NEW  GUIDES  TO  OLD  MASTERS 

BY  JOHN  C.  VAN  DYKE 


London — National  Gallery,  Wallace  Collection. 
With  a  General  Introduction  and  Bibliog- 
raphy for  the  Series net  $1.00 

Paris — Louvre       .  net      .75 

Amsterdam — Rijks  Museum  "i 

The  Hague — Royal  Gallery    >  bound  together  .  net      .75 

Haarlem — Hals  Museum       ) 


Brussels — Royal  Museum     )  ,         ,  ,       . , 
An^erp-Royal  Museum     ^ound  together  .  nef      .75 


n. 
in. 


IV. 
V. 

VI. 
VII. 


VIII. 
IX. 


X.     Florence — Ufflzi,  Pitti,  Academy 
XI.     Rome — Vatican,  Borghese  Gallery 
XII.    Madrid — Prado 


Munich — Old  Pinacothek      } 

Frankfort — Staedel  Institute  >  bound  together 

Cassel — Royal  Gallery  ) 

Berlin— Kaiser-Friedrich      } 

Museum  >  bound  together 

Dresden — Royal  Gallery  ) 
Vienna — Imperial  Gallery  ^ 
Budapest — Museum  of  Fine  > bound  together 

Arts                                     ) 
St.  Petersburg — Hermitage , 

together 


net  l.Oo 
net  1.00 

net    1.00 

In  Press 
In  Press 

In  Press 
In  Press 
In  Press 


OLD  PINACOTHEK,  MUNICH 
STAEDEL  INSTITUTE,   FRANKFORT 


ROYAL  GALLERY,  CASSEL 


Photograph  by  Bruckmnnn.  Munich 

BARTOLOMMEO  VENETCK      PORTRAIT    OF   YOUNG   WOMAN 
The  Staedel  Institute,  Frankfort-on-Main 


NEW   GUIDES   TO   OLD   MASTERS 

MUNICH,  FKANKFORT, 

CASSEL 

CRITICAL  NOTES  ON  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK, 

THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE,  THE  CASSEL 

ROYAL  GALLERY 


BY 

JOHN  C.  VAN  DYKE 

u 

AUTHOR  o»  "ABT  FOB  ART'S  BAKE,"  "THE  MEANING  OF  PICTURES,' 
"HISTORY  OP  PAINTING,"  "OLD  DUTCH  AND 

FLEMISH  MASTEBS,"  ETC. 


NEW  YORK 

CHARLES   SCBiEBNER'S   SONS 
1914 

>  ,  ,      >         !    1 »    a      .'>•'< 


K3 


COPYRIGHT,   1914,   BY 

CHARLES  SCRIBNEB'S  SONS 


Published  May,  1914 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

THERE  are  numerous  guide-books,  catalogues,  and 
histories  of  the  European  galleries,  but,  unfortunately 
for  the  gallery  visitor,  they  are  either  wholly  descrip- 
tive of  obvious  facts  or  they  are  historical  and  ar- 
chaeological about  matters  somewhat  removed  from  art 
itself.  In  them  the  gist  of  a  picture — its  value  or  mean- 
ing as  art — is  usually  passed  over  in  silence.  It  seems 
that  there  is  some  need  of  a  guide  that  shall  say  less 
about  the  well-worn  saints  and  more  about  the  man 
behind  the  paint-brush;  that  shall  deal  with  pictures 
from  the  painter's  point  of  view,  rather  than  that  of 
the  ecclesiastic,  the  archaeologist,  or  the  literary  ro- 
mancer; that  shall  have  some  sense  of  proportion  in 
the  selection  and  criticism  of  pictures;  that  shall  have 
a  critical  basis  for  discrimination  between  the  good  and 
the  bad;  and  that  shall,  for  these  reasons,  be  of  ser- 
vice to  the  travelling  public  as  well  as  to  the  art  student. 

This  series  of  guide-books  attempts  to  meet  these 
requirements.  They  deal  only  with  the  so-called  "  old 
masters."  When  the  old  masters  came  upon  the 
scene,  flourished,  and  ceased  to  exist  may  be  deter- 
mined by  their  spirit  as  well  as  by  their  dates.  In 
Italy  the  tradition  of  the  craft  had  been  established 
before  Giotto  and  was  carried  on  by  Benozzo,  Botti- 

v 


393596 


vi  PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

celli,  Raphael,  Titian,  Tintoretto,  even  down  to  Tie- 
polo  in  the  eighteenth  century.  But  the  late  men, 
the  men  of  the  Decadence,  are  not  mentioned  here 
because  of  their  exaggerated  sentiment,  their  inferior 
workmanship — in  short,  the  decay  of  the  tradition  of 
the  craft.  In  France  the  fifteenth-century  primitives 
are  considered,  and  also  the  sixteenth-century  men, 
including  Claude  and  Poussin;  but  the  work  of  the 
Rigauds,  Mignards,  Coypels,  Watteaus,  and  Bouchers 
seems  of  a  distinctly  modern  spirit  and  does  not  be- 
long here.  This  is  equally  true  of  all  English  painting 
from  Hogarth  to  the  present  time.  In  Spain  we  stop 
with  the  School  of  Velasquez,  in  Germany  and  the 
Low  Countries  with  the  seventeenth-century  men. 
The  modern  painters,  down  to  the  present  day,  so  far 
as  they  are  found  in  the  public  galleries  of  Europe, 
will  perhaps  form  a  separate  guide-book,  which  by  its 
very  limitation  to  modern  painting  can  be  better 
treated  by  itself. 

Only  the  best  pictures  among  the  old  masters  are 
chosen  for  comment.  This  does  not  mean,  however, 
that  only  the  great  masterpieces  have  been  considered. 
There  are,  for  instance,  notes  upon  some  three  hun- 
dred pictures  in  the  Venice  Academy,  upon  five  hun- 
dred in  the  Uffizi  Gallery,  and  some  six  hundred  in 
the  Louvre  or  the  National  Gallery,  London.  Other 
galleries  are  treated  in  the  same  proportion.  But  it 
has  not  been  thought  worth  while  to  delve  deeply  into 
the  paternity  of  pictures  by  third-rate  primitives  or 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES  vii 

to  give  space  to  mediocre  or  ruined  examples  by  even 
celebrated  painters.  The  merits  that  now  exist  in  a 
canvas,  and  can  be  seen  by  any  intelligent  observer, 
are  the  features  insisted  upon  herein. 

In  giving  the  relative  rank  of  pictures,  a  system  of 
starring  has  been  followed. 

Mention  without  a  star  indicates  a  picture  of  merit, 
otherwise  it  would  not  have  been  selected  from  the 
given  collection  at  all. 

One  star  (*)  means  a  picture  of  more  than  average 
importance,  whether  it  be  by  a  great  or  by  a  medi- 
ocre painter. 

Two  stars  (**)  indicates  a  work  of  high  rank  as  art, 
quite  regardless  of  its  painter's  name,  and  may  be  given 
to  a  picture  attributed  to  a  school  or  by  a  painter  un- 
known. 

Three  stars  (***)  signifies  a  great  masterpiece. 

The  length  of  each  note  and  its  general  tenor  will  in 
most  cases  suggest  the  relative  importance  of  the  picture. 

Catalogues  of  the  galleries  should  be  used  in  con- 
nection with  these  guide-books,  for  they  contain  much 
information  not  repeated  here.  The  gallery  catalogues 
are  usually  arranged  alphabetically  under  the  painters' 
names,  although  there  are  some  of  them  that  make 
reference  by  school,  or  room,  or  number,  according  to 
the  hanging  of  the  pictures  in  the  gallery.  But  the 
place  where  the  picture  may  be  hung  is  constantly 
shifting;  its  number,  too,  may  be  subject  to  alteration 
with  each  new  edition  of  the  catalogue;  but  its  painter's 


viii  PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

name  is  perhaps  less  liable  to  change.  An  arrangement, 
therefore,  by  the  painters*  names  placed  alphabetically 
has  been  necessarily  adopted  jn  these  guide-books. 
Usually  the  prefixes  "de,"  "df,"  "van/'  and  "von" 
have  been  disregarded  in  the  arrangement  of  the  names. 
And  usually,  also,  the  more  familiar  name  of  the  artist 
is  used — that  is,  Botticelli,  not  Filipepi;  Correggio,  not 
Allegri;  Tintoretto,  not  Robusti.  In  practical  use  the 
student  can  ascertain  from  the  picture-frame  the  name 
of  the  painter  and  turn  to  it  alphabetically  in  this  guide- 
book. In  case  the  name  has  been  recently  changed, 
he  can  take  the  number  from  the  frame  and,  by  turning 
to  the  numerical  index  at  the  end  of  each  volume,  can 
ascertain  the  former  name  and  thus  the  alphabetical 
place  of  the  note  about  that  particular  picture. 

The  picture  appears  under  the  name  or  attribution 
given  in  the  catalogue.  If  there  is  no  catalogue,  then 
the  name  on  the  frame  is  taken.  But  that  does  not 
necessarily  mean  that  the  name  or  attribution  is 
accepted  in  the  notes.  Differences  of  view  are  given 
very  frequently.  It  is  important  that  we  should  know 
the  painter  of  the  picture  before  us.  The  question  of 
attribution  is  very  much  in  the  air  to-day,  and  consider- 
able space  is  devoted  to  it  not  only  in  the  General  In- 
troduction but  in  the  notes  themselves.  Occasionally, 
however,  the  whole  question  of  authorship  is  passed 
over  in  favour  of  the  beauty  of  the  picture  itself.  It 
is  always  the  art  of  the  picture  we  are  seeking,  more 
than  its  name,  or  pedigree,  or  commercial  value. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES  ix 

Conciseness  herein  has  been  a  necessity.  These 
notes  are  suggestions  for  study  or  thought  rather  than 
complete  statements  about  the  pictures.  Even  the 
matter  of  an  attribution  is  often  dismissed  in  a  sentence 
though  it  may  have  been  thought  over  for  weeks. 
If  the  student  would  go  to  the  bottom  of  things  he 
must  read  further  and  do  some  investigating  on  his 
own  account.  The  lives  of  the  painters,  the  history  of 
the  schools,  the  opinions  of  the  connoisseurs  may  be 
read  elsewhere.  A  bibliography,  in  the  London  vol- 
ume, will  suggest  the  best  among  the  available  books 
in  both  history  and  criticism. 

The  proper  test  of  a  guide-book  is  its  use.  These 
notes  were  written  in  the  galleries  and  before  the  pic- 
tures. I  have  not  trusted  my  memory  about  them,  nor 
shall  I  trust  the  memory  of  that  man  who,  from  his 
easy  chair,  declares  he  knows  the  pictures  by  heart. 
The  opinions  and  conclusions  herein  have  not  been 
lightly  arrived  at.  Indeed,  they  are  the  result  of  more 
than  thirty  years'  study  of  the  European  galleries. 
That  they  are  often  diametrically  opposed  to  current 
views  and  beliefs  should  not  be  cause  for  dismissing 
them  from  consideration.  Examine  the  pictures,  guide- 
book in  hand.  That  is  the  test  to  which  I  submit  and 
which  I  exact. 

Yet  with  this  insistence  made,  one  must  still  feel 
apologetic  or  at  least  sceptical  about  results.  However 
accurate  one  would  be  as  to  fact,  it  is  obviously  impos- 
sible to  handle  so  many  titles,  names,  and  numbers 


x  PREFACE  TO  THE  SERIES 

without  an  occasional  failure  of  the  eye  or  a  slip  of  the 
pen;  and  however  frankly  fair  in  criticism  one  may 
fancy  himself,  it  is  again  impossible  to  formulate  judg- 
ments on,  say,  ten  thousand  pictures  without  here  and 
there  committing  blunders.  These  difficulties  may  be 
obviated  in  future  editions.  If  opinions  herein  are 
found  to  be  wrong,  they  will  be  edited  out  of  the  work 
just  as  quickly  as  errors  of  fact.  The  reach  is  toward 
a  reliable  guide  though  the  grasp  may  fall  short  of  full 
attainment. 

It  remains  to  be  said  that  I  am  indebted  to  Mr.  and 
Mrs.  George  B.  McClellan  for  helpful  suggestions  re- 
garding this  series,  and  to  Mr.  Sydney  Philip  Noe  not 
only  for  good  counsel  but  for  practical  assistance  in 
copying  manuscript  and  reading  proof. 

JOHN  C.  VAN  DYKE. 
RUTGERS  COLLEGE,  1914, 


THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK,  MUNICH 


NOTE  ON  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

THE  Old  Pinacothek  is  one  of  the  best-known  and 
most-frequented  galleries  of  Europe.  Perhaps  this  is 
due  to  the  fact  that  Munich  lies  in  the  direct  route  to 
or  from  Italy,  and  travellers  use  it  as  a  resting-place. 
But,  aside  from  its  convenient  location,  the  gallery 
draws  visitors  by  virtue  of  its  masterpieces.  Some  of 
them  were  acquired  long  years  ago,  for  the  Bavarian 
princes  were  patrons  of  art  so  far  back  as  the  sixteenth 
century.  Albert  V  (1550-1579)  brought  together  the 
first  collection  of  pictures,  and  William  V  helped  to  in- 
crease it,  but  it  took  its  decided  impulse  from  Maxi- 
milian, the  first  Elector  of  Bavaria.  Max  Emanuel 
(1679-1726)  made  great  acquisitions  at  Schleissheim, 
and  built  there  his  palace-gallery  to  hold  them.  In 
1761  an  inventory  of  these  pictures  showed  over  a  thou- 
sand numbers.  The  various  collections  of  the  Wittels- 
bachs  were  further  increased  in  1799  by  a  third  group 
of  pictures  from  the  Palatinate — that  of  Zweibrucken. 
Then  began  the  concentration  of  the  collections  at 
Munich.  In  1805  the  pictures  in  the  Diisseldorf  Gal- 
lery were  removed  to  Munich  to  escape  being  taken  to 
Paris.  With  that  gallery  came  many  of  the  celebrated 
Rubenses  in  the  present  collection.  The  last  large 
group  of  pictures  to  come  here  was  the  Boisseree  Col- 

3 


NOTE  ON  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 


lection  of  Rhenish  art.  It  was  received  in  1827  and 
added  greatly  to  the  representation  of  German  pictures. 

The  Munich  Gallery  is  particularly  rich  in  early  Ger- 
man work  and  has  some  remarkable  altar-pieces  in  the 
first  rooms  the  visitor  enters.  In  sincerity,  as  in  dec- 
orative feeling  and  excellent  workmanship,  nothing 
could  be  finer  than  the  panels  here  by  Apt,  Reichlich, 
Pacher,  Schaffner,  Lochner.  Nothing  could  be  more 
tragic  than  the  Burgkmairs,  or  more  melodramatic  than 
the  Baldungs,  or  more  romantically  picturesque  than 
the  Altdorfers.  Besides  these  there  are  pictures  by 
Griinewald,  Wolgemut,  Holbein  the  Elder,  the  Master 
of  Frankfort,  the  Master  of  the  Life  of  the  Virgin, 
Master  Wilhelm  of  Cologne,  Cranach  the  Elder,  and 
a  notable  group  of  Albrecht  Diirers.  In  fact,  the  Old 
Pinacothek  is  famous,  and  justly  so,  for  its  presentation 
of  German  art. 

But  perhaps  the  gallery  is  better  known  to  the  travel- 
ling public  because  of  its  large  collection  of  pictures  by 
Rubens.  There  are  over  eighty  examples  of  him  listed 
in  the  catalogue,  and  many  of  them  are  of  great  ex- 
cellence and  beauty.  His  pupil,  Van  Dyck,  is  shown 
in  no  less  than  thirty-six  pictures,  some  of  them  much 
injured,  but  others  in  good  condition  and  fairly  represen- 
tative. To  Rembrandt  are  given  ten  or  more  examples, 
including  his  early  series  of  the  Passion,  and  by  his 
followers,  Bol,  Flinck,  Gelder,  and  others  there  are 
some  excellent  works.  Here,  too,  one  sees  a  rare  pic- 
ture by  Sweerts,  some  fine  small  portraits  by  Terborch, 


NOTE  ON  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK  5 

interiors  by  Steen  and  Teniers,  and  many  landscapes 
by  the  Ruisdaels.  In  no  gallery  save  that  at  Brussels 
can  one  see  Bouts  so  brilliantly  represented.  Some  of 
his  most  perfect  work  in  form  and  colour  is  shown  here 
in  a  small  altar-piece.  Here,  too,  one  sees  the  Master 
of  the  Death  of  the  Virgin  (Juste  van  Cleve)  at  his 
best,  and  there  are  pictures  by  Van  der  Weyden,  Mem- 
ling,  Lucas  van  Leyden. 

Striking  as  is  the  presentation  of  German,  Dutch, 
and  Flemish  art  at  Munich,  there  is  still  a  surprise  in 
the  Italian  pictures.  There  are  some  famous  names 
and  some  not  unworthy  pictures  to  represent  them. 
Perugino  and  Francia  are  here  in  large  and  very  im- 
portant examples.  Fra  Filippo,  Filippino,  Botticelli, 
Ghirlandajo,  Andrea  del  Sarto  do  not,  perhaps,  fare  so 
well,  but  to  Raphael  are  given  three  very  creditable 
pictures  and  to  Titian  eight  canvases,  including  the 
Crowning  with  Thorns,  and  an  excellent  portrait  (No. 
1111).  By  Palma  there  is  a  small  Faun  that  is  gem- 
like,  by  Lotto  a  delightful  Marriage  of  St.  Catherine, 
by  Tintoretto  several  pictures,  including  the  Christ  in 
the  House  of  Mary  and  Martha,  and  a  fine  portrait. 
The  Italian  showing  is  important. 

The  catalogue  (in  German,  with  illustrations)  is  well 
printed,  sufficiently  descriptive  and  candidly  critical. 
In  case  of  the  disputed  attribution  of  a  picture  (a  fre- 
quent occurrence)  the  catalogue  gives  the  ascriptions  of 
the  authorities  pro  and  con,  while  adhering  to  its  own 
conviction.  This  method  of  treating  conflicting  opin- 


6  NOTE   ON   THE   OLD   PINACOTHEK 

ions  seems  proper  and  is  meeting  with  acceptance  in 
many  of  the  galleries.  The  arrangement  in  the  cat- 
alogue is  alphabetical,  under  the  artists'  names,  but  on 
the  wall  the  pictures  are  placed  by  countries  and 
schools.  The  hanging  is  good  as  is  also  the  lighting. 
One  can  usually  see  the  pictures  very  well. 

Photographs  of  the  pictures  can  be  bought  hi  almost 
any  art  shop  in  Munich  as  well  as  at  the  gallery. 
There  is  a  Hanfstaengl  publication  of  half-tone  repro- 
ductions that  gives  the  chief  pictures. 


THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 


288.  Altdorfer,    Albrecht.    Forest   with   St.    George 
and  Dragon.     An   interesting   early   study   of   a 
forest  with  an  outlook  to  distant  mountains.     It 
is  beautifully  done  and,  for  all  its  minute  detail, 
not  niggled  or  laboured  in  its  surface.     Such  work 
as  this  is  astonishing  when  the  painter's  period 
(1480-1538)  is  taken  into  consideration.    See  also 
No.  293. 

293.  Mountain  Landscape.  A  charming  little  land- 
scape in  every  way.  Notice  the  trees  and  bushes 
at  the  right  of  the  road  with  the  castle  in  the 
middle  distance.  Here  are  light  and  air  both.  The 
sky  and  distant  mountains  are,  perhaps,  too  blue 
for  the  rest  of  the  picture. 

289.   Susanna  at  the  Bath.    A  fantastic  piece  of 

architecture  in  both  form  and  colour.     The  little 
figures  in  the  distant  arcades  and  platforms  are 
amusing.    The  left  side  of  the  picture  is  very  charm- 
ing in  its  landscape.     Altdorfer  excels  in  landscape. 
And  what  knowledge  of  mountain  forms  he  shows ! 
He  was  taught  mountain  anatomy  by  Diirer.    With 
a  good  blue  in  the  sky. 

290.    Battle  of  Arbela.     Said  to  be  Altdorfer's  mas- 
terpiece, probably  because  it  is  littered  up   with 
many  figures  and  countless  details.    It  is  amazing 

7 


8  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

in  these  details,  but,  save  for  the  sky  and  distant 
landscape,  it  is  somewhat  like  the  Lord's  Prayer 
engraved  on  a  sixpence.  No.  291  is  in  the  same 
vein,  and  neither  of  them  is  so  interesting  as  the 
landscapes,  Nos.  288  and  293. 

989-  \  Angelico,  Fra.  Scenes  from  Lives  of  St.  Cosmo 
992  J  and  St.  Damian.  Small  panels  taken  from  the 
predella  of  a  picture  in  San  Marco,  Florence.  They 
are  genuine  enough,  but  not  remarkable  as  art,  nor 
are  they  the  best  Angelicos.  The  Entombment, 
with  its  simple  figures  arranged  in  an  arch  com- 
position (repeated  in  the  rocky  hill)  and  with  its 
naive  flowers,  is  perhaps  the  best  of  the  series. 
Fra  Angelico  is  to  be  seen  aright  only  in  Florence. 

1310.    Antolines,     Jose.      Immaculate    Conception.      A 

Spanish  picture  of  much  beauty  in  the  type  of  the 
Madonna,  in  the  composition,  in  the  colour,  in 
the  textures  of  the  silk  dress.  A  much  stronger 
work  than  the  same  theme  by  Murillo  in  the 
Louvre.  The  putti  below  are  somewhat  mon- 
strous in  size  with  badly  drawn  eyes.  An  early 
work  and  showing  some  slight  influence  of  Van 
Dyck. 

1588.  An  onello  da  Messina.  Madonna.  Hard  in 
the  lines  of  face  and  hands.  The  blue  of  the  dress 
is  cold  against  the  dark  ground,  but  the  picture  is 
nevertheless  attractive.  On  wood,  worm-eaten 
and  slightly  broken  in  spots.  The  attribution  is 
questioned  although  the  picture  is  in  the  style  of 
Antonello. 

1590.    Apt,  Ulrich.     Altar  Triptych.     It  is  good  in  col- 

*        our  and  the  decorative  effect  is  excellent.     There 

are  fine  skies  and  landscapes  in  all  three  panels. 

The  Madonna  at  the  left  with  the  plaintive  little 


BASAITI,     MARCO  9 

Child  is  very  nice  in  feeling,  and  the  saint  at  the 
left  of  the  central  panel  wears  a  robe  of  much 
beauty.  On  the  reverse  of  the  wings  are  figures  in 
grisaille. 

292.   Pieta.     A  picture  of  much  excellence,  espe- 

*  cially  in  the  landscape,  though  the  figures  are  also 
given  with  force  of  line  and  hue.  The  white  of  the 
head-dresses  is  repeated  in  the  hill  of  Calvary,  the 
clouds,  and  the  figure  of  Christ.  There  is  strong 
feeling  shown  in  the  St.  John  and  in  the  beautiful 
Magdalen. 

286.    Baldung,  Hans.     Portrait  of  the  Margrave  Philip. 

An  excellent  portrait,  carefully  drawn,  and  good  in 
colour  as  in  the  characterisation.  Placed  a  little 
awkwardly  on  the  panel,  but  it  is  very  decorative. 
The  hand  hurt. 

1441.   Music.     A   graceful  nude  figure,  full  length, 

*  evidently  standing  in  a  cave,   and  beside  her  a 
white  cat.     Perhaps  over-cleaned  and  rendered  a 
little  flat  in  modelling,  but  it  is  still  a  wonderful 
revelation  of  form  largely  by  linear  drawing.     No- 
tice the  grace  of  the  outline  of  the  figure.     The 
black-and-white  contrast  is  effective. 

1440.   Wisdom.    Companion   piece   to   Music   (No. 

*  1441)  and  with  the  same  forced  effect  of  the  white 
figure   against   the   dark  background   of   a   cave. 
Not  so   conventional   in   pose   as   its   companion 
piece.     A  very  striking  piece  of  linear  drawing — 
beautiful  as  line  and  for  line's  sake.     The  attitude 
reminds  one  of    Cranach's  Eve  in  the  Antwerp 
Museum  (No.  42). 

1032.    Basaiti,  Marco.     Pieta.     It  is  too  crude  and  hard 
in  the  drawing  for  Basaiti.     See  the  much-injured 


10  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

Basaiti  (No.  1031)  in  this  gallery  for  comparison 
in  a  general  way  only.  One  can  get  but  a  faint 
idea  of  him  from  these  examples.  His  best  work 
is  in  the  Venice  Academy. 

1148.  Bassano,  Jacopo.  5*.  Jerome.  A  very  good 
Bassano,  simpler  in  composition  than  usual  and 
the  better  for  it.  What  a  well-modelled  figure, 
and  what  excellent  colour!  The  landscape  is  at- 
tractive and  the  whole  pi  ture  has  wholesome  light- 
ing. Bassano  was  usually  " forced"  in  his  depth  of 
shadows.  Here  he  is  truer  to  nature  and  his  colour 
is  the  clearer  for  its  higher  illumination. 

1150.  Madonna  with  St.  Anthony  and  St.  Augus- 
tine (?).  The  reasons  for  ascribing  it  to  Bassano 
are  not  very  apparent.  It  is  more  likely  the  work 
of  some  Verona  painter  or  some  follower  of  Paolo 
Veronese.  But  a  good  picture.  The  colour  is  un- 
usually effective.  The  hand  of  the  saint  at  the 
right  is  Giorgionesque,  as  shown  in  the  Castelfranco 
Madonna.  Somewhat  repainted. 

1444.  Madonna  with  St.  Roch  and  John  the  Bap- 
tist. By  the  same  hand  as  No.  1150.  Much  re- 
painted and  changed  in  colour.  Notice  the  brown- 
ish clouds  and  the  Veronese  blue  in  the  sky.  The 
painter  of  this  picture  evidently  used  the  same  kind 
of  pigments  (fugitive  and  otherwise)  as  did  Paolo 
Veronese. 

1446.   Beuckelaer,   Joachim..    The  Fishmonger.    The 

dishes  are  placed  somewhat  out  of  perspective, 
probably  with  the  intent  of  filling  the  canvas  satis- 
factorily. A  strong  picture.  Beuckelaer  should 
be  studied  at  Brussels,  where  there  are  remarkable 
pictures  (Nos.  782,  783)  by  him  and  his  master, 


BLES,  HERRI  MET  DE  11 

Aertsen.     This  one  is  excellent  in  the  heads  and 
hands    and    very    well   painted   in   the   fish   and 
kettle. 
146.    Bles,  Herri  met  de.     Adoration  of  Kings.    The 

painter  of  this  picture  is  called  the  pseudo-Bles 
and  thought  to  be  an  imitator  of  Bles;  but  Bles 
himself  is  only  a  name,  and  his  pictures  are  con- 
fused in  the  various  galleries.  It  is  possible  that 
the  painter  of  this  picture  painted  the  three  Adora- 
tions at  Brussels,  the  Esther  at  Bologna,  the  Be- 
heading of  John  at  Berlin  (No.  630c),  the  Solomon 
triptych  at  The  Hague  (No.  433),  the  Calvary 
(No.  649),  the  Decapitation  of  John  (No.  857),  and 
the  Adoration  (No.  208)  at  Antwerp.  He  may 
have  had  two  or  three  different  manners.  In  this 
picture,  for  instance,  there  is  more  or  less  elegance 
of  pose  in  the  central  figures;  but  the  drawing  is 
careless,  especially  in  the  feet.  The  colour  and 
high  lights  are  a  bit  spotty,  and  there  are  many 
small  objects.  It  may  be  his  decadent  style.  At 
Antwerp  he  draws  larger  and  seems  less  mannered, 
which  may  point  to  an  earlier  style.  At  Madrid 
(No.  1361)  he  is  well  rounded,  fine  in  colour  and 
light,  true  in  ensemble.  This  may  be  his  mature 
and  ripened  style.  Patinir  and  Bosch  may  have 
had  something  to  do  with  forming  him.  Gossart 
and  even  Cornelisz  van  Oostsanen  may  also  have 
had  an  influence  upon  him.  The  difficulty  in  at- 
tributing his  pictures  arises  from  our  having  no 
criterion  by  which  to  judge.  We  do  not  know  what 
is  genuinely  Bles,  and  what  is  pseudo-Bles.  In  the 
attributions  of  these  pictures  thus  far  there  has 
been  an  association  of  subjects  rather  than  of  styles. 
The  landscape  here  is  unlike  Patinir.  The  An- 
nunciation here  (No.  145)  hardly  agrees  with  the 


12  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

Bles  pictures  elsewhere.     See  the  note  on  Bles  (No. 
657)  in  the  Vienna  Gallery. 

338.  Bol,    Ferdinand.     Portrait  of  a  Man.     This   is 
Bol  when  he  was  following  the  grey-golden  manner 
of  his  master,   Rembrandt.     Indeed,   the  picture 
has  passed  for  a  Rembrandt,  but  it  is  too  weak  in 
the  modelling  for  that  master.     It  is,  however,  an 
excellent  Bol.      He  never  did   anything  surer  or 
better.     From  it   and   its  companion  piece   (No. 
339)  one  can  easily  understand  how  the  Bols  came 
to  pass  current  as  Rembrandts.     His  best  works  are 
perhaps  catalogued  as  Rembrandts  to  this  day. 

339.   Portrait  of  a  Lady.     Companion  piece  to  No. 

338.     Very  Rembrandtesque,  but  wanting  in  pre- 
cision and  certainty  of  touch,   especially  in  the 
dress,  the  chain,  the  white  at  the  throat,  and  the 
hair.     The  mouth,  eyebrows,  nose,  and  forehead 
are  weak  in  modelling.     Once  ascribed  to  Rem- 
brandt.    Both   this   portrait   and   No.   338   were 
falsely  signed  with  Rembrandt's  name. 

1120.  Bordone,  Paris.     Portrait  of  a  Man.     A  much- 
attributed  picture,  as  the  catalogue  suggests.     If  it 
could  only  be  relieved  from  the  suspicion  of  having 
been  painted  by  a  nobody  of  Venice  it  might  be 
thought  a  very  decent  portrait.     It  has  the  sensi- 
tive quality  of  a  Lotto  and  the  serenity  and  poise 
of  a  Titian. 

1121.   Man  with  Jewels.    Not  the  best  example  of 

Bordone.     The  woman  at  the  right  is  too  much 
sacrificed  in  light  and  colour,  and  the  jewels  are  too 
prominent.     The   man   is   not   badly   done.     The 
picture  is  much  repainted  as  one  may  see  by  a 
glance  at  the  hands. 


BOUTS,  THIERRI  13 

1010.  Botticelli,  Sandro.  Pieta.  It  is  perhaps  not  a 
Botticelli,  but  by  some  member  of  his  school,  yet 
a  very  good  picture  just  the  same.  It  is  an  arch 
composition,  the  arched  lines  of  the  dead  Christ 
being  repeated  by  the  backs  of  the  saints  above 
and  again  by  the  rocky  opening  of  the  tomb. 
The  drawing  is  coarse  but  virile  and  the  action 
rhythmic  and  forceful.  What  a  tragic  feeling  about 
the  whole  group!  The  kneeling  women  are  pa- 
thetic, and  the  slight,  graceful  form  of  the  beardless 
Christ  is  altogether  lovely  in  death.  Notice  the  stiff 
arm  and  the  flung-down  head.  The  sentiment  of 
the  picture  is  good.  And  so,  too,  the  colour,  only 
it  is  darker  than  is  usual  with  Botticelli.  The  bal- 
anced halo  on  each  head  is  a  little  disturbing.  The 
panel  is  worm-holed,  but  otherwise  in  good  condi- 
tion. The  same  painter  did  the  Annunciation 
(No.  1316)  in  the  Uffizi;  the  Pieta  (No.  552)  in 
the  Poldi-Pezzoli  Museum,  Milan,  and  the  An- 
nunciation (No.  1117)  at  Berlin. 

114.  Bouts,  Albert.  Annunciation.  This  painter  was 
never  the  equal  of  his  father,  Thierri  Bouts,  but 
this  picture  appears  weaker  than  the  same  painter's 
work  at  the  Brussels  Museum.  A  grey  tone  is 
apparent  in  it. 

107]  Bouts,  Thierri  (or  Dirck).     Adoration  of  Magi. 

108  A  triptych  with  a  St.  John  at  left  and  a  St.  Chris- 

109  J  topher  at  right.     An  excellent  example  of  Bouts. 

Notice  the  fine  heads  in  the  central  panel,  the  head 
and  hands  of  the  king  who  kneels  before  the  Child, 
and  the  brocade  of  the  king  back  of  him.  The 
detail  of  gems,  the  hat  on  the  ground,  the  present 
on  the  table,  the  roses  growing  on  the  wall  below, 
are  all  beautifully  done.  Observe  also  the  pro- 


14  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

cession  of  the  kings'  followers  coming  down  in  a 
swinging  line  from  the  background — a  beautifully 
clear  landscape  with  a  city  in  the  distance.  The 
St.  Christopher  panel  shows  an  early  study  of  sun- 
set with  the  reflection  of  the  sun  in  the  water. 
The  water  with  its  attempt  at  wave  drawing  is 
really  remarkable.  The  distant  hills  are  perhaps 
too  blue  in  all  three  panels,  but  the  foreground, 
especially  in  the  left  panel,  is  very  lovely.  The 
grass  is  in  a  pattern  like  that  of  a  brocade.  Fine 
figures  in  grisaille  are  on  the  back  of  the  wings. 

110.    The  Priest  Melchisedek.     An  excellent  cres- 

**      cent-shaped  composition.     The  man  at  the  right 

is  as  stiff  and  unbending  as  the  spear  he  holds, 
but  how  fine  he  is  in  character!  The  patriarch 
Abraham,  just  below  him,  kneels  badly ;  but,  again, 
what  a  face  and  what  a  dress  he  has !  Melchisedek 
is  superb  in  his  green-red-gold  embroidered  cos- 
turn  3.  Every  detail  is  perfect,  and  every  colour 
exactly  true  in  value.  All  the  heads  are  strong, 
even  those  in  the  cavalcade  of  riders  winding  down 
the  valley  at  the  right.  And  the  colour  is  simply 
superb.  It  would  seem  impossible  to  get  richer 
notes  than  these  and  preserve  the  harmony.  Per- 
haps there  is  too  much  polish  or  gloss  about  them, 
yet  one  could  not  wish  them  different.  Look  at 
the  town  and  landscape  at  back.  Part  of  an  altar- 
piece  from  St.  Peters,  Louvain.  Other  parts  are 
in  the  Berlin  Gallery,  which  see. 

111.    The  Israelites  Gathering  Manna.     A  compan- 
ion picture  to  No.  110,  and  from  the  same  Louvain 
altar-piece,  but  perhaps  not  so  altogether  attrac- 
tive a  picture.     The  landscape  lacks  in  repose  and 
is  uneasy  in  its  hills.     The  figures  in  the  fore- 


BOUTS,  THIERRI  15 

ground  are  excellent.  How  the  painter  harmo- 
nises such  colours,  for  instance,  as  the  blue  and  yel- 
low in  the  kneeling  figure  of  the  man  at  left,  and  the 
blue,  red,  gold,  green,  purple  in  the  man  back  of 
him!  He  is  a  wonder  of  early  art.  Such  work- 
manship, such  quality  in  colour,  such  fine  senti- 
ment are  rare  at  any  period.  The  types  should 
not  repel  one,  nor  the  smooth,  flawless  surface. 
They  are  both  excellent.  j 

112.    The  Betrayal.     A   moonlight   effect  in   early 

**  art!  Notice  the  study  (over  the  church  at  back) 
of  the  blue  night  sky,  the  reflection  of  the  moon  on 
the  clouds  and  the  shrouded  hills.  The  two  pitiful 
figures  in  red  in  the  left  upper  corner  (evidently 
fleeing  apostles)  are  rightly  placed  in  the  atmos- 
pheric envelope.  The  ensemble  is  remarkable. 
The  figures  in  the  foreground  are  huddled,  but  full 
of  tragic  action.  Here  again  are  fine  robes  and 
fine  colours,  but  they  have  hardly  the  quality  of 
those  in  Nos.  110-111.  Is  it  by  Bouts  or  by 
some  follower  of,  say,  Ouwater?  There  is  some 
relation  between  the  painter  of  this  picture  and  the 
Master  of  the  Ly versberg  Passion.  See  the  latter's 
Taking  of  Christ  in  the  Wallraf-Richartz  Museum, 
Cologne.  This  picture  is  somewhat  hurt. 

A4Q.   Resurrection  of  Christ.     There  is  no  lack  here 

**  of  fine  art.  The  figures  are  almost  perfectly  done 
the  colours  are  superb  (in  the  costume  of  the  sol- 
dier lying  on  the  ground,  for  instance),  the  land- 
scape broad  and  free  for  an  early  work,  and  the 
whole  picture  very  well  held  together.  As  for  sen- 
timent, how  charmingly  it  shows  in  the  little  angel 
in  white,  in  the  Christ,  in  the  group  of  the  apostles 
witnessing  the  Ascension  at  the  back!  Again,  is 


16  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

the  picture  by  Bouts?  It  is  evidently  by  the 
painter  of  No.  112,  with  which  it  should  be  com- 
pared. Who  but  Bouts  could  do  such  work?  Who 
but  he  ever  painted  such  blues,  greens,  yellows,  and 
golds?  Yet  there  is  a  feeling  that  some  follower 
of  Ouwater  may  have  done  it. 

880.  Brouwer,  Adriaen.  Barber  Shop.  There  are  a 
dozen  or  more  Brouwers  in  this  gallery  of  his  usual 
quality.  Perhaps  Nos.  879,  880,  882  are  as  good 
as  any  of  them  as  regards  colour  and  handling. 
Never  very  attractive  in  subject,  Brouwer  is  always 
interesting  in  method.  He  is  emphatically  a  paint- 
er's painter. 

702.    Brueghel  the  Elder,  Jan  (Velvet).    Landscape. 

To  be  studied  closely  for  the  small  groups  and  the 
delightful  way  in  which  they  keep  their  place  in 
the  landscape.  A  very  picturesque  town  and 
country.  See  also  No.  687,  which  is  perhaps  finer 
in  colour. 

90.    Bruyn,   Bartolomaus.     Portrait  of  a  Man.    A 

school  piece,  but  not  badly  done.  It  has  a  straight- 
forward feeling  about  it. 

68-  1 Altar-Piece.     Honest  work,  but  not  very  cun- 

72  j  ning  technically  or  profound  emotionally.  The 
landscapes  at  the  side  with  the  richly  robed  saints 
are  more  interesting  than  the  central  panel. 

Bueckelaer.     See  Beuckelaer. 

222A-E.  Burgkmair,  Hans.     The  St.  John  Altar-Piece. 

*  Excellent  in  robes,  trees,  and  landscape.  The  col- 
our is  deep  and  strong,  the  drawing  fairly  good,  and 
the  handling  very  true  and  sure.  The  two  Johns 
on  the  outside  of  the  panels  are  finely  given.  No- 


CARRENO  DE  MIRANDA,  JUAN  17 

tice  also  the  Crucifixion  Triptych  near  by  (No. 
1451A-E)  for  a  similar  but  stronger  landscape  and 
sky. 

1451A-E.    Crucifixion.     A    coarse-fibred    work    with 

*  little  grace  of  line  or  charm  of  colour,  but  full  of 
pathos  and  tragic  power.  Notice  the  figure  at 
the  foot  of  the  cross,  the  stiff,  crucified  form  of  the 
Christ,  the  stormy  sky,  the  wind-tossed  trees,  the 
cold,  hard  landscape  of  the  distance.  There  is  a 
great  tragedy  in  the  very  air.  To  this  feeling  the 
ill-drawn  Madonna  in  white,  the  Magdalen,  and 
St  John  give  the  key-note.  It  is  a  powerful  group, 
arranged  in  the  shape  of  a  crescent  at  the  foot  of 
the  cross.  The  hanging  figures  in  the  wings  sup- 
plement and  carry  out  the  tragedy;  the  swirl  of 
dark  clouds  and  the  standing  saints  below  intensify 
it.  The  deep,  sombre  colouring,  the  white  moun- 
tains, the  aureole  of  dark  clouds  about  the  Christ 
are  all  in  keeping  with  the  sentiment.  Figures  of 
St.  George  and  the  Emperor  Henry  are  on  the  re- 
verse of  the  wings.  See  also  No.  10A  at  Cassel. 

220.    Portrait  of  Martin  Schongauer.     A  fine  little 

portrait.  However  you  look  at  it,  it  proves  satis- 
factory. The  drawing  and  colour  are  excellent. 
There  may  be  doubts  about  the  identity  of  both 
sitter  and  painter — doubts  are  plentiful  in  art  criti- 
cism— but  no  matter.  The  work  is  good  in  itself. 

1268 1  CanalettO    (BelottO   B.).      Grand    Canal   Scenes. 

1269  J  They  are  no  better  than  the  ordinary  variety  of 
canal  scene,  done  cleverly  and  with  topographical 
truth,  but  with  no  great  verve  or  spirit. 

1302.  Carreiio  de  Miranda,  Juan.  Portrait  of  Dona 
Maria  of  Austria.  A  very  sad-faced  woman — a 
queen  and  yet  a  piteous  figure.  The  picture  is 


18  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

fairly  well  done — no  more.  That  Carreiio  did  it 
is  possible.  It  is  in  his  style,  but  perhaps  a  little 
prosaic  even  for  him. 

1027 )  Catalan    School.     St.    Ambrose    and   St.    Louis. 

1028  J  The  two  panels  are  decidedly  decorative  in  their 
gold  stucco  work.  The  drawing  of  the  faces  is 
crude.  They  are  probably  by  some  follower  of 
Borgognone. 

1033.  Cima,  Giovanni  Battista.  Madonna,  Child,  and 
*  Saints.  A  handsome  conversation  piece  and  an 
excellent  Cima.  The  colour  is  exceptionally  good 
although  the  drawing  is  a  little  hard,  after  the 
manner  of  all  early  Renaissance  work.  The  types 
of  the  Madonna  and  the  Magdalen  are  lovable,  and 
there  is  a  nice  feeling  about  the  theme,  the  char- 
acters, and  the  treatment.  Notice  the  clear  sky 
and  the  mountain  landscape. 

1324 1  Claude  Lorraine.  Hagar  and  IshmaeL  A  por- 
1325  J  trait  by  Titian,  Rubens,  Rembrandt,  or  Velasquez 
will  to-day  more  than  hold  its  own  in  conception 
and  execution  with  the  best  work  of  any  modern. 
Is  it  unfair  to  apply  such  a  test  to  the  landscapes  of 
Claude?  They  are  serene  in  conception,  peaceful, 
slightly  panoramic,  pseudo-heroic,  with  only  a 
slight  basis  in  nature.  Technically,  they  are  thin, 
crude,  almost  boyish  in  workmanship.  The  mod- 
erns in  landscape  have  gone  far  beyond  Claude 
in  perception,  light,  colour,  drawing,  handling. 
Look  at  these  Hagar  and  Ishmael  landscapes  at 
close  range  for  their  feeble  drawing  of  mountains, 
clouds,  trees,  rocks,  and  their  timid,  thin  painting. 
Yet  the  general  effect  of  a  Claude  is  often  im- 
pressive— perhaps  unduly  so.  It  has  given  him  an 
exaggerated  fame. 


COLOGNE,  SCHOOL  OF  19 

55  1  Cleve,  Juste  van  der  Beke  van  (The  Master  of 

56  |  the  Death  of  the  Virgin).     The  Death  of  the 

57  J  Virgin.    An  altar-piece  with  two  wings — the  painter 
*     taking   his   name   from   the   central   panel.     His 

proper  name  is  thought  to  be  Juste  van  der  Beke 
van  Cleve,  an  Antwerp  painter,  but  there  is  no 
certainty  about  this.  Nor  is  there  any  great  cer- 
tainty about  the  pictures  attributed  to  him.  Sev- 
eral pictures  in  Brussels,  Antwerp,  Paris,  and  else- 
where seem  to  be  by  the  same  hand  that  painted 
this  altar-piece — that  is  all.  But  the  altar-piece 
is  an  excellent  one,  done  with  much  delicacy  and 
skill,  and  remarkable  in  some  of  its  texture  paint- 
ing, as,  for  instance,  in  the  fine  portraits  of  donors 
kneeling  beneath  the  banner  of  St.  George.  The 
women  at  left  have  good  robes,  and  there  are  fine 
landscapes  in  both  panels. 

1315.    Clouet,  Francois.     Claudia,  Wife  of  Duke  Charles 

II.  Colourless  but  careful  work  in  a  miniature 
style,  and  with  some  mannerisms.  It  is  not  at  all 
certain  that  any  Clouet  did  it.  The  attribution  is 
only  a  conjecture  founded  on  the  picture's  general 
resemblance  to  the  Clouet  style. 

L314.  Clouet,  Jean  (called  Jannet).  Portrait  of  a 
Young  Man.  Flat  in  the  figure  and  hard  in  the 
drawing  of  the  face  outlines,  but  honest  work. 
Possibly  by  some  one  in  the  Clouet  School.  The 
hands  are  hurt. 

219.  Cologne,  School  of  (about  1470).  Portrait  of 
an  Architect.  An  excellent  portrait,  now  a  little 
flat  in  modelling,  but  very  good  in  characterisa- 
tion. What  fine,  even  distinguished,  colour  is 
here!  It  has  been  variously  attributed  to  Jan  van 
Eyck's  School,  to  Burgkmair,  Schaffner,  et  al. 


20  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

270.  Cranach  the  Elder,  Lucas.    Madonna  and  Child. 

Why  is  it  not  good  in  sentiment  and  colour?  It 
has  not  the  Italian  type  nor  composition,  but  if 
we  have  any  catholicity  of  taste  we  cannot  choose 
but  admire  these  naive  creations  of  Cranach. 
This  picture  may  be  by  the  younger  Cranach,  but 
that  does  not  matter.  There  are  charming  cherubs 
at  the  top  and  a  mountain  city  in  the  background. 

271.   Lucretia.     A   picture  showing  the  type  and 

style  of  drawing  usually  employed  by  Cranach, 
though  this  example  may  have  been  done  in  the 
school.     The  figure  is  flat  in  modelling,   and  of 
course  there  is  awkwardness  and  constraint  about 
it.     That  forms  its  attraction  to  some.     As  out- 
line drawing  with  a  suggestion  of  modelling,  it  is 
excellent.     It  has  been  repainted,  unfortunately, 
so  that  the  line  is  now  somewhat  muffled.     The 
red  robe  is  still  good  in  colour  though  a  later  addi- 
tion.    Compare  it  with  the  Lucretia  of  Diirer  (No. 
244),  across  the  room. 

272.    Madonna  and  Child.     Small  and  perhaps  a 

little  pretty,  but  it  has  charm  of  colour  and  ten- 
derness of  feeling. 

275.    Moses  and  Aaron.     What  a  fine  spot  of  colour 

it  makes!  And  what  sturdy  figures  in  little!  A 
fragment  from  some  larger  picture,  probably  an 
allegory  of  the  Fall  of  Man. 

279.    Madonna  and  St.   Anne.     A  Cranach  school 

piece,  probably,  but  what  a  good  group  of  figures 
in  a  fine  landscape!  And  with  a  rich  colour  effect! 
Cranach  had  three  sons,  all  of  them  painters,  and 
presumably  all  of  them  following  the  father.  But 
how  many  pictures  by  the  sons  do  we  see? 


CUYP,  AELBERT  21 

1457.  Christ  on  Cross.  Gruesome  in  theme,  with 

brown  flesh  shadows,  swirled  drapery,  and  dark 
clouds.  The  Madonna  and  St.  John  are  fine,  tall 
figures,  rich  in  colour  and  profound  in  feeling.  A 
picture  of  power.  It  does  not  speak  for  Cranach. 
Notice  how  different  the  landscape  here  from  that 
of  No.  279  or  270  or  1460.  The  figures,  drapery, 
and  colour  are  also  different.  It  hardly  belongs 
even  to  the  Cranach  School. 

1462.  Cranach  the  Younger,  Lucas.  Venus  and 
Cupid.  It  is  weaker,  prettier,  more  graceful  draw- 
ing than  that  of  the  elder  Cranach,  but  more  en- 
gaging in  type  and  colour.  Seen  against  the  dark 
ground,  the  figure  has  a  cameo  look  and  quality 
about  it.  The  Cupid  is  amusing. 

1016A.    Credi,  Lorenzo  di.     Madonna,  Child,  and  Angel. 

A  good  picture  though  done  in  a  rather  heavy  man- 
ner. A  little  warmer  in  flesh-notes  and  robes  than 
usual  with  Lorenzo.  Notice  the  landscape  at  the 
right.  See  also  the  Leonardo  da  Vinci,  No.  1040A, 
for  comparison. 

1017.  -  —Nativity.  The  figures  fill  the  circle  fairly  well, 
and  are  types  similar  to  Lorenzo's,  but  the  work- 
manship seems  a  little  finical  and  minute  for  this 
painter.  Notice  the  painting  of  the  hair,  the  leaves 
on  the  wall,  the  trees  in  the  background — how 
Flemish-looking  they  are  in  their  handling!  It 
may  be  by  some  imitator  or  follower  of  Lorenzo. 

475.  Cuyp,  Aelbert.  Landscape.  These  small,  unpre- 
tentious pictures  of  the  Dutch  painters  are  often 
more  truly  enjoyable  than  the  large  academic  ex- 
amples— such  compositions  as  those  of  Ruisdael, 
for  instance.  This  picture  is,  perhaps,  nearer  Van 
Goyen  than  Cuyp.  It  has  fine  light  and  colour. 


22  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

1463.  Cuyp,  Benjamin  G.  Man  with  Horse.  Look  at 
it  for  the  life  and  spirit  of  the  animal  and  the  fine 
colour  quality  of  the  picture.  It  has  the  tang  of 
true  art  about  it.  The  pictures  of  Benjamin  Cuyp 
should  always  be  closely  looked  at.  He  is  a  painter 
of  much  force. 

118.  David,  Gerard.  Adoration  of  Magi.  Hurt  by 
repainting  and  never  very  good.  Notice  the  poorly 
drawn  trees,  the  horses  and  riders  at  back,  the 
Joseph  at  right,  or  the  legs  of  the  negro  at  left. 
Attribution  questionable.  Dr.  Friedlander  thinks 
it  a  David  copy  of  a  Hugo  van  der  Goes. 

407.  Dou,  Gerard.  A  Lady  at  Toilet  Table.  This  is 
a  good  example  of  Dou's  small  method.  The  mi- 
nutiae of  it  are  microscopic.  Look  at  the  table- 
cloth, curtain,  stone  basin,  dress.  It  is  detail  for 
detail's  sake.  This  led  the  way  to  all  the  little  art 
of  Mieris,  Netscher,  and  Schalken,  of  which  the 
European  galleries  have  enough  and  to  spare.  It 
is  snuff-box  painting  of  no  great  value  as  art,  for 
all  its  skill. 

238.  Durer,  Albrecht.  Deposition.  A  remarkable 
picture,  not  so  much  for  its  foreground  figures  as 
for  the  painter's  knowledge  of  mountain  forms  as 
shown  in  the  background.  It  is  a  little  savage  in 
the  drawing  and  handling  of  the  figures,  but  the 
mountains  will  stand  up  against  criticism.  Re- 
painted in  parts  and  by  no  means  a  satisfactory 
picture.  For  a  Diirer  it  lacks  in  interest — a  most 
deadly  thing  in  either  picture  or  book.  It  is  proper 
to  add,  however,  that  there  is  disagreement  on  this 
point.  Some  writers  think  it  a  "hauptwerk." 
Much  repainted,  and  with  the  false  monogram  of 
Diirer  on  the  linen. 


DURER,  ALBRECHT  23 

240]     The    Nativity:    Paumgartner  Altar-Piece.     A 

241  !•  triptych  with  the  best  figures  in  the  wings.     St. 

242  j  Eustach  and  St.  George,  with  their  banners  forming 
**      arabesques  at  the  back,  are  portraits  of  real  per- 
sonages not  ideals  of  saints.     Only  recently  these 
side  panels  were  freed  from  over-paintings  in  the 
backgrounds.     They   are   excellent   in    type   and 
drawing   as  well   as  in  colour.     How  well   they 
stand!    They  seem  to  epitomise  Diirer's  art  quite 
perfectly.     The  cupids  and  little  portraits  of  donors 
in  the  lowei;  corners  of  the  central  panel  were  pur- 
posely placed  out  of  scale  with  the  Madonna  and 
St.  Joseph.    They,  too,  were  recently  brought  out 
from  under  repainting.     It  is  one  of  the  most  at- 
tractive of  Diirer's  pictures,  charming  in  parts  and 
forceful  elsewhere.     It  will  bear  study  and  appear 
the  better  for  it. 

247.   St.  John  and  St.  Peter.    With  large  and  full 

drawing  of  drapery,  huge  figures,  huge  heads,  and 
a  somewhat  bizarre  effect.     Not  bad  in  colour  and 
with  considerable  freedom  of  brush-work,  but  other- 
wise not  remarkable.     They  are  real  enough  but 
not  lovable  people.     Nor  are  they  interesting  even 
though  Durer  did  them.     His  work  seems  to  lose 
in  interest  as  it  expands  in  scale.    This  panel  and 
No.  248  are  sometimes  called  The  Four  Preachers. 
Late  work. 

248.   St.  Paul  and  St.  Mark.    These  figures  again 

are  not  exactly  convincing  apostolic  types.     Nor 
are  the  colour  values  of  the  white  robe  at  all  true. 
They  may  have  changed.     Companion  piece  to 
No.  247  and  in  the  same  style,  but  even  less  inter- 
esting than  that  panel.     The  usual  critical  esti- 
mate of  these  panels  is  higher  than  here  stated. 


24  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

244.  Lucretia.  It  might  be  compared  with  the 

*  same  subject  by  Cranach  (No.  271)  for  the  differ- 
ence in  colour  and  drawing.  The  Diirer  is  more 
mature  in  the  modelling  of  the  figure  and  in  the 
naturalistic  ease  with  which  it  stands.  The  faded 
high  lights  in  the  drapery  (derived  from  Italian  art) 
are  not  exactly  a  success.  The  figure  is  said  to 
have  been  inspired  by  Mantegna  but  such  inspira- 
tion is  not  very  apparent.  It  is  a  fine  figure  and 
improves  on  repeated  seeings.  Somewhat  re- 
painted. 

239.    Portrait  of  the  Painter.     One  of  the  most  cele- 

**  brated  of  the  Diirer  pictures.  Done  with  a  very 
minute  brush  (see  the  strokes  in  the  hair,  beard, 
and  fur  collar),  as  though  preparing  a  pattern  for 
engraving  and  indicating  the  engraver's  lines.  A 
really  wonderful  portrait  in  that,  with  all  its  mi- 
nutiae, it  holds  together  and  is  not  a  mere  surface 
effect.  It  is  absolute  in  its  drawing  (look  at  the 
mouth,  eyes,  hands)  and  just  as  true  in  its  light-and- 
shade  and  in  its  colouring.  Probably  somewhat 
deepened  in  tone  by  glazes  and  varnishes.  The 
signature  and  inscription  in  gold  help  the  decora- 
tive effect  of  the  panel.  It  has  more  force  but  less 
charm  than  the  smaller  Durer  portrait  now  in  the 
Prado,  Madrid.  The  back  of  the  panel  was  sawn 
away,  in  the  last  century,  and  a  copy  painted  on 
the  new  face,  evidently  with  intent  to_deceive.  The 
copy  is  now  in  the  Germanic  Museum,  at  Nurem- 
berg. 

236.  Portrait  of  Oswald  Krell.  A  good  portrait  in 

Diirer's  early  style.  The  nose  and  mouth  are  queer 
in  drawing,  the  hair  and  beard  minute,  the  hands 
nervous,  the  sleeve  zigzagged,  the  trees  formal.  It 
is  effective  but  not  Diirer  at  his  best. 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  25 

249.    Portrait  of  Jacob  Fugger.     Once,  no  doubt,  a 

fine  bit  of  portraiture,  but  now  nearly  wrecked  by 
repainting.  The  green  background  is  all  of  it 
solidly  overlaid  and  fits  up  snug  to  the  figure. 
Compare  the  fur  collar  with  that  in  No.  239  for  the 
difference  between  Diirer's  brush  and  that  of  the 
restorer.  A  strong  head  and,  but  for  its  shameful 
treatment,  a  masterpiece  of  realism. 

237.    Portrait    of    Hans    Durer    (?).      Effective    in 

spite  of  distorted  drawing.  The  mouth,  nose,  and 
chin  are  askew.  The  ear,  too,  is  abnormally  placed. 
The  same  drawing  is  noticeable  in  the  Krell  por- 
trait (No.  236).  Said  to  be  an  early  work,  but  it 
may  be  questioned  if  it  is  Durer  at  all.  A  good 
portrait,  nevertheless,  and  fine  in  colour  as  in  char- 
acterisation. 

825.    Dyck,  Anthony  van.    Christ  on  the  Cross.    How 

far  it  falls  below  the  Rubens  of  the  same  subject 
(No.  748)  in  this  gallery!  It  is  inferior  in  feeling, 
imagination,  form,  colour,  and  handling.  It  has 
blackened  somewhat,  but  probably  was  never  very 
luminous,  convincing,  or  well  drawn.  Other  ver- 
sions are  in  the  Vienna  and  Antwerp  galleries. 

824.    Martyrdom  of  St.  Sebastian.     The  figure  of 

*  the  saint  makes  a  white  centre,  about  which  is 
ranged  a  not  too  obvious  circle  of  darker  notes  in 
flesh  colour,  red,  and  blue.  There  is  some  good 
drawing  in  the  shoulders  of  the  saint,  as  well  as 
some  bad  drawing  in  his  hips,  left  leg,  and  hand. 
Notice  the  strange  head  without  a  neck  of  the 
figure  kneeling,  or  the  bad  arm  and  hand  and  thin 
face  of  the  mounted  soldier.  The  head  of  the  man 
in  blue  is  perhaps  the  best  part  of  the  picture. 
Much  injured;  also  pieced  out  at  the  top  and  side, 


26  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

with  the  work  of  another  hand  in  the  additions. 
Even  so,  such  work  as  this  is  vastly  better  than  that 
in  the  smooth  and  rather  pretty  subject  pictures 
by  Van  Dyck  in  the  Vienna  Museum. 

826.    Madonna,  Child,  and  St.  John.     The  painter 

seems  to  have  done  this  with  a  thought  of  Titian 
in  his  mind.     At  any  rate  instead  of  getting  Titian's 
largeness  he  got  only  Rubens's  lumpiness.     The 
figure  of  the  Child  is  somewhat  monstrous.     The 
Madonna  and  St.  John  are  more  Italian  and  more 
acceptable.     The  colour  is  not  bad  save  for  the 
acrid  blue.     The  lamb  looks  like  a  dog. 

827.   Flight   into  Egypt.     The  picture   is   merely 

pretty,  is  badly  drawn  (look  at  the  eyes  of  the 
Madonna),  and  is  very  weak  in  sentiment  and 
colour. 

850.    Portrait  of  Peter  Snayers.     An  excellent  small 

*  head  in  a  style  that  suggests  Van  Dyck  following 
Rubens.     It  is  valuable  as  showing  Flemish  paint- 
ing quite  uninjured  by  cleanings  or  restorations. 
It  should  be  kept  in  mind,  not  as  being  peculiar  or 
characteristic  of  Van  Dyck,  for  that  it  is  not,  but  as 
being  pure,  clear  writing  with  the  brush  as  taught 
in  the  Flemish  School  of  Rubens.     The  nose  is  a 
little  curious  in  drawing,  but  that  probably  helped 
out  the  personality  of  the  sitter.     The  good  mouth, 
firm  chin,  and  jaw  make  up  for  it. 

830.    Deposition.     It  is  difficult  in  this  gallery  to 

*  get  an  idea  of  Van  Dyck's  handling,  because  so 
many  of  the  pictures  and  portraits  put  down  to 
him    have    been    injured    by    restorations.     This 
Deposition,  which  is  painted  on  wood,  gives  the 
best  idea  of  his  brush-work,  without  being  wholly 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  27 

satisfactory.  The  flesh  colour  follows  Rubens,  but 
is  deeper  and  darker  with  grey  or  brown  or  reddish 
shadows.  Of  course  the  picture  is  darkened  by 
its  dark  underbasing.  The  figure  of  the  Christ  is 
rather  good,  and  the  general  composition  is  sat- 
isfactory though  too  dramatic.  In  colour,  Van 
Dyck  always  comes  into  contrast  with  Rubens,  and 
to  his  disadvantage. 

844  }  Colyn  de  Nole  and  Wife.     The  man's  portrait, 

845  /  in  the  style  of  Rubens,  is  careless,  but  not  in  bad 
*       condition.     The  woman's  portrait,  though  slightly 

repainted  in  the  face,  is  still  very  good  in  every  way. 
A  fine  type  of  a  woman,  seen  with  keenness  and 
penetration,  and  done  with  good  taste  and  feeling. 
This  is  Van  Dyck  in  his  nobler  strain.  The  child 
does  not  help  out  the  picture,  nor  yet  harm  it. 

822.   Susanna.     It  is  about  done  for  by  much  res- 
toration.    Look  at  the  wrecked  modelling  of  the 
legs,  knees,  feet,  hands.     The  faces  are  just  as 
badly  repainted. 

828.   Pieta.     It   is   inconceivable   that   Van   Dyck 

could  have  left  this  picture  as  we  at  present  see  it. 
The  drawing  is  too  bad.  There  is  still  a  feeling  of 
collapse  about  the  white  figure  and  a  holding  to- 
gether of  the  pyramidal  group.  The  colours  and 
the  surface  are  now  not  Van  Dyck's  but  those  of 
some  cleaning-room  artist. 

823.    Martyrdom  of  St.  Sebastian.     The  scheme  of 

lighting  in  No.  824  is  here  repeated,  with  perhaps 
less  effect,  inasmuch  as  the  figure  of  the  saint  is 
less  central  in  its  grouping.     There  is  better  draw- 
ing than  in  No.  824 — the  figure  of  the  saint  being 
very  well  given.     The  figures  at  the  side  are  hud- 


28  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

died,  and  the  white  horse  seems  a  little  absurd. 
The  light  is  dull  and  the  colour  hot.  The  cata- 
logue points  out  that  the  saint  is  a  portrait  of  Van 
Dyck. 

833.    Portrait  of  the  Painter.     Some  of  the  under- 
lying work  of  the  brush  is  here  apparent,  but  the 
surface  has  been  much  rubbed.     It  is,  however, 
still  a  good  portrait,  done  easily  and  with  certainty. 
The  likeness  to  Van  Dyck  is,  perhaps,  superficial. 

834.    Portrait  of  George  PeteL     It  is  still  in  fair 

*      condition  and  will  bear  close  study,  especially  in 

the  head.  For  lack  of  a  better,  it  might  be  taken 
in  this  gallery  as  a  criterion  of  Van  Dyck's  handling, 
as  well  as  his  drawing.  By  comparison  with  other 
portraits  enumerated  below,  it  will  be  easy  to  see 
the  differences  caused  by  the  repainting  or  retouch- 
ing of  the  restorer's  brush.  With  finely  drawn  eyes 
and  nose,  and  easily  painted  hair. 

849.  Portrait  of  Mary  Rathven.  This  IS  supposed 

to  be  a  likeness  of  Van  Dyek's  wife,  but  it  is  no 
likeness  of  his  painting.  What  dreadful  eyes  and 
eyelids !  What  a  nose  and  mouth  to  put  upon  Van 
Dyck !  It  is  ruined  by  repainting,  even  if  originally 
by  Van  Dyck. 

861.  Portrait  of  Jan  Brueghel.  Done  by  a  follower 

of  Rubens,  with  more  imitative  skill  and  less  per- 
sonality than  Van  Dyck.  If  one  should  believe 
the  gallery  catalogues  Van  Dyck  never  had  a 
pupil,  helper,  follower,  or  imitator.  He  did  every- 
thing that  in  any  way  resembles  his  style.  What  a 
mistake!  He  had  plenty  of  imitators  who  followed 
him  abjectly.  Their  works  are  now  passing  in  the 
European  galleries  for  genuine  Van  Dycks.  How 
often  do  you  see  portraits  by  Hanneman,  Belcamp, 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  29 

Jan  van  Reyn,  Peter  Thys,  Beck,  Merian,  Stone, 
Dobson?  They  were  all  pupils  and  assistants  of 
Van  Dyck,  who  worked  up  his  portraits  for  him  and 
probably  finished  many  of  them.  They  also  made 
copies  galore  of  his  portraits  and  figure  pieces.  But 
where  do  you  see  or  hear  anything  of  these  shop 
pieces  and  copies?  It  is  always  Van  Dyck  (never 
his  school  or  his  assistants)  who  is  credited  with  the 
work. 

847.    Portrait  of  Carl  Mailer y.     A  single  glance  at 

this  picture  from  across  the  gallery  must  suggest 
instantly  the  presence  of  the  restorer.  The  apoplec- 
tic flesh  and  the  grey  tones  that  go  with  repaint- 
ing are  apparent.  This  is  equally  true  of  Nos.  835, 
839,  840,  842,  843,  and  848.  They  were  originally 
fine  portraits,  no  doubt.  They  still  have  the  air 
of  the  immortals,  and  are  well  drawn,  well  placed 
on  the  canvas;  but  it  is  not  just  to  Van  Dyck  to 
judge  him  now  by  such  works.  Look  at  the  clean, 
clear  surface  of  No.  834,  and  that  portrait  will  em- 
phasise the  difference  between  Van  Dyck  and  his 
restorers. 

837.    Portrait  of  Duke  of  Pfalz-Neuburg.     There  is 

a  good  deal  of  Van  Dyck  still  in  the  finely  poised 
figure,  the  column,  curtain,  and  dog.  How  well 
the  model  is  placed  upon  his  feet!  How  easily  he 
rests!  It  is  a  fine  portrait,  set  in  a  good  envelope, 
with  just  enough  colour  in  the  rug  and  curtain  to 
emphasise  the  blacks. 

841.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     It  has  not  the  aplomb  of 

No.  837,  nor  the  dignity.  The  figure  is  heavy  and 
the  hand  mannered.  It  has  been  much  injured  by 
repainting.  All  the  background  looks  done  over, 
and  the  figure  has  not  escaped. 


30  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

348.  Eeckhout,  Gerbrandt  van  den.  Christ  with  the 
Doctors.  It  may  be  profitably  compared  with  some 
of  the  work  ascribed  to  Rembrandt  with  so  much 
positiveness  in  the  various  European  galleries.  He 
was  one  of  the  master's  most  deceptive  imitators. 
A  good  picture,  with  good  colour,  light,  and  group- 
ing of  the  figures. 

1469.  Engelbrechtsen,  Cornells.  St.  Constantine  and 
St.  Helena.  Notice  the  sentiment  in  the  St.  Helena, 
-  with  the  sad  face  and  the  tall  figure.  The  colour 
of  the  green  robe  is  effective.  Odd  and  somewhat 
mannered  art,  but  that  does  not  repel  us  in  II 
Greco.  Why  should  it  here?  Formerly  ascribed 
to  Lucas  van  Leyden. 

566.    Everdingen,  Allaert  van.    Northern  Landscape. 

In  the  same  vein  as  Ruisdael,  only  perhaps  blacker 
in  the  shadows  and  brighter  in  the  light  of  the  sky. 
There  is  no  reason  to  think  either  of  them  found 
models  for  landscape  in  Norway.  They  painted 
their  landscapes  out  of  their  heads,  in  the  studio, 
and  never  worried  much  about  the  truth  or  falsity 
of  the  convention  they  were  turning  out  with  such 
facility. 

1023.  Ferrara,  School  of.  Madonna,  Child,  and  Saints. 
Excellent  in  colour  if  hard  in  drawing  and  angular 
in  drapery.  It  is  honest  work  done  with  good 
feeling  and  right  in  sentiment.  Notice  the  archi- 
tecture and  brocades.  It  is  by  some  follower  of 
Cossa  or  Tura.  The  figure  at  the  extreme  left, 
however,  suggests  the  Vivarini.  Ascribed  formerly 
to  Mantegna  and  now  thought  by  Venturi  and 
others  to  come  from  some  Veronese  painter. 

1039.    Francia,    Francesco.    Madonna    of    the    Rose 
*       Garden.    A   well-known   Francia   much  admired 


GADDI,  AGNOLO  31 

for  the  purity  of  its  sentiment  and  the  simple 
beauty  of  the  rose  arbour.  It  is  cold  in  colour — 
the  little  scrap  of  red  under  the  Child,  the  Ma- 
donna's red  hair,  and  the  pale  roses  not  being  suffi- 
cient to  influence  the  larger  scheme  of  blues  and 
greens.  It  is  a  very  tender  and  loving  Madonna 
and  a  lovely  Child.  In  fact,  the  feeling  and  senti- 
ment of  the  picture  are  its  attractive  features. 
Notice  the  naive  arrangement  of  the  roses,  also  the 
thin  trees,  the  crude,  almost  boyish  landscape, 
with  the  formal,  sharp-pointed  clouds  that  explode 
in  puffs  of  white  smoke.  The  space  at  the  back 
has  breadth  but  is  rather  empty. 

1040.  Madonna  and  Angels.  Glassy,  smooth,  and 

somewhat  perfunctory  in  its  doing.  The  colour  is 
bright  and  the  sentiment  proper,  but  it  is  not  a 
very  important  work.  Art  consists  of  something 
more  than  wistful-looking  angels  and  pretty  Ma- 
donnas, as  Francia  proved  in  other  pictures.  See 
No.  1039  by  him. 

1470.  French  School.  Portrait  of  Denise  Fournier.  A 
heavy  type  given  with  frankness  and  with  no  at- 
tempt to  disguise  the  small  eyes  and  mouth  or  the 
large  nose.  These  features  were  doubtless  true  to 
the  model,  and  were  put  down  without  apology. 
The  black  of  the  cap  and  the  red  of  the  dress  are 
well  handled. 

94.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  With  sharply  drawn,  ner- 
vous hands  and  wandering  eyes.  A  good  portrait, 
but  rubbed  and  cleaned  too  much.  Formerly 
given  to  the  German  School. 

1539     1  Gaddi,  Agnolo.     St.  Nicholas   and  St.  Julian. 
1540A  /  Two  large  panels  somewhat  repainted  and  re- 
gilded,  but  still  attractive  in  their  rich,  decorative 


32  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

schemes  of  colour  upon  gold  and  gold  upon  colour. 
The  predellas  are  less  interesting.  Put  down  on 
the  frames  to  Stamina.  The  Gaddi  attribution  is 
doubtful.  The  Giottesque  pictures  are  not  yet 
read  as  one  might  an  open  book — in  fact,  they  are 
still  very  much  confused. 

1009.  Garbo,  Raffaellino  del.  Deposition.  It  is  cold 
and  pallid  in  colour,  uneasy  and  restless  in  draperies, 
huddled  in  composition,  and  perhaps  a  bit  over-done 
in  sentiment.  It  has  no  repose — not  even  in  the 
sky.  At  the  back  there  are  formal  layers  of  blue 
hills.  Not  the  best  example  of  Raffaellino,  if  by 
him  at  all.  Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle  put  it  down  to 
Filippino.  Formerly  it  was  a  Ghirlandajo  and 
then  a  Jacopo  del  Sellajo.  It  is  probably  a  school 
piece  of  some  sort,  which  may  account  for  its  con- 
tradictory features. 

1080.  Garofalo    (Benvenuto    Tisi).    Pieta.     A   much 
larger  picture  than  this  master  usually  painted. 
The  saint  at  the  left  in  flowing  robes  is  effective. 
The  landscape  breaks  sharply  from  the  brown  fore- 
ground into  the  green-blue  background. 

1081.    Madonna   with    Saints.     A    small    but    very 

good  example  of  Garofalo.     The  St.  George  is  par- 
ticularly attractive.     The  colour  is  predominant 
in  greens  and  blues;   the  landscape  at  the  back  a 
little  disjointed. 

355.  Gelder,  Aert  de.  The  Jewish  Bride.  The  figures 
at  the  right  are  sacrificed  to  the  bride  in  the  centre 
— too  much  so.  The  lighting  is  Rembrandtesque 
and  not  trut]iful,  but  effective  in  bringing  out  the 
central  figure.  This  figure  is  badly  placed  on  the 
canvas.  The  right  side  is  empty  and  of  little 


GIOTTO  DI  BONDONE  33 

value.  The  colour  is  good  but  the  handling  un- 
certain. The  picture  is  by  Aert  de  Gelder,  the 
painter  of  the  supposed  Rembrandt  at  the  Hermi- 
tage, the  Prodigal  Son  (No.  797),  which  shows 
faults  of  composition  similar  to  those  in  this  pic- 
ture. 

356.  Portrait  Study.  How  very  like  a  poor  Rem- 
brandt! The  student  should  make  a  mental  note 
of  such  pictures,  for  there  are  plenty  of  portraits 
with  just  as  loose  and  careless  drawing  as  this 
passing  as  Rembrandts  in  European  galleries. 

1011.    Ghirlandajo,  Domenico.     Madonna  with  Saints. 

The  centre  panel  of  this  altar-piece  is  bright  in 
colour,  formal  in  its  balanced,  pyramidal  composi- 
tion, disturbing  in  the  angels  and  the  radiating 
rays  from  the  Madonna.  It  has  a  good  if  hard 
landscape  and  a  poor  sky.  The  figures  at  left  and 
right  stand  well  and  have  well-drawn  robes.  The 
drawing  is  correct  enough  but  lacks  spirit  and 
charm.  It  is  perfunctory  shop  work.  The  side 
panels  (Nos.  1012  and  1013)  are  less  pretentious  and 
better  than  the  centre  piece. 

1077.  Ghirlandajo,  Ridolfo.  Madonna,  Child,  and  St. 
John.  The  painter  of  this  picture  was  evidently 
following  Raphael's  Madonna  of  the  Meadow,  at 
Vienna,  and  not  doing  it  very  well.  It  is  not  an 
important  picture.  Probably  Ridolfo  never  saw  it. 

981.  Giotto    di    Bondone.     Crucifixion.     The    gold 
ground  and  colour  are  ornamental.     The  catalogue 
calls  it  a  school  piece.     It  is  probably  by  some  fol- 
lower of  the  Gaddi. 

982.    Christ  Descending  into  Hell.     The  figures  are 

too  frail  for  Giotto,  and  tend  toward  a  conscious 


34  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

grace,  as  in  the  figure  of  Christ.  Also  the  moun- 
tain is  too  crude.  The  picture  is  Giottesque  but 
not  by  the  same  hand  that  did  No.  981. 

983.   Last  Supper.     The  figures  are  sack-like,  the 

room  is  well  drawn  for  the  time,  the  colour  varie- 
gated, the  decorative  quality  rather  good.  Perhaps 
a  workshop  picture. 

155.  Gossart,   Jan   (Mabuse).     Madonna  and  Child. 

The  attempt  of  a  Fleming  to  appropriate  things 
Italian,  and  with  rather  good  results.  Notice  the 
handsome  Renaissance  niche  at  the  back  with  the 
Flemish-Italian  figure.  The  drapery  is  uneasy,  is 
washed  out  in  the  high  lights,  and  pallid  in  the  red. 
The  picture  has  charm. 

156.    Danae.     With  Gossart's  reminiscences  of  Italy 

showing  in  the  architecture  as  in  the  type  of  face 
and  figure.     The  Fleming,  however,  still  crops  out 
of  it.    The  colour  of  the  blue  robe  is  too  cold  and 
the  light  is  dull.    Very  elaborate  and  exact  but  not 
very  original  or  sincere  art. 

535.  Goyen,  Jan  van.  Landscape.  In  Van  Goyen's 
usual  vein.  Perhaps  a  little  more  carelessly  done 
than  some  of  his  other  works  but  still  decorative 
in  tone.  No.  537  is  somewhat  injured  but  is  of 
the  same  general  quality.  No.  536  is  poorer  work 
— a  panel  that  aspires  but  does  not  attain. 

1485.  Greco,  II  (Domenico  Theotocopuli).  The  Dis- 
robing of  Christ.  A  crowded  composition  but 
given  with  the  feeling  of  a  crowd.  It  has  most  of 
II  Greco's  mannerisms  of  drawing  and  lighting,  his 
sootiness  of  flesh,  his  morbid  colouring,  but  perhaps 
the  types  are  more  rational  and  believable  than 
usual.  There  is  a  fine  decorative  quality  about  it. 


HALS,  FRANS  35 

One  always  feels  as  though  his  pictures  would 
make  up  well  in  stained  glass  or  tapestry.  And 
there  is  also  intensity  of  feeling  about  them. 

281.  Griinewald,  Matthias.  St.  Mauritius  and  Bishop 
Erasmus.  The  figures  are  over  life-size  and  ap- 
pear a  little  grotesque,  but  they  are  remarkable 
in  the  decorative  quality  of  the  robes  and  the 
armour.  There  is  good  painting,  with  loose  drawing 
almost  everywhere  in  the  picture. 

1486.   Scourging  of   Christ.     A   powerful    but    in- 
tensely brutal  conception.    Notice  the  action  of  the 
man  in  the  violet  jacket,  or  the  attitude  of  the  man 
with  the  rope.     The  colours  are  bleached  out  in  the 
high  lights.     An  early  work,  very  well  done,  and 
extraordinary  in  its  colour  quality.     There  is  force 
in  the  colour — something  we  usually  recognise  in 
line  or  modelling. 

1487.  Guardi,  Francesco.    Venetian  Concert.  The  light 
of  the  picture  is  neither  sunlight  nor  candle-light 
and  the  rows  of  spotty  high  lights  upon  the  costumes 
are  purely  arbitrary.     But  these  high  lights  are 
effective  in  giving  sparkle  and  glitter — perhaps  too 
much  so.     The  room  is  well  shown,  with  cool  hues 
above  and  warm  ones  below.     The  shadows,  too, 
are  effective.     It  is  a  forced  effect,  but  certainly  has 
some  strength  about  it,  though  it  is  possibly  not 
Guardi's  strength. 

1488.  Hals,    Frans.     Portrait  of  William   Croes.     It  is 

small  and  sketchy,  freely  handled,  but  positive 
enough  in  its  characterisation  of  the  man.  What 
cheeks,  nose,  mouth,  and  eyes  he  has!  A  bluff, 
physical  portrait  with  a  swagger  air  in  the  sitter. 
The  blacks  and  whites  are  admirably  handled. 


16  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

359.   A  Family  Croup.     A  much-attributed  picture, 

as  the  catalogue  explains.  Whoever  painted  it 
originally,  it  is  now  so  covered  with  repaintings  as 
to  make  any  inquiry  into  its  paternity  not  worth 
while.  It  is  ruined. 

315.  Heist,   Bartholomeus  van  der.    Portrait  of  a 
Man.     There  is  not  very  much  colour  in  it,  and  it 
is  somewhat  too  smooth  in  its  surfaces,  but  an 
honest  portrayal  of  an  honest  Dutchman. 

316.   Portrait  of  a  Woman.     Companion  piece  to 

No.  315.     The  dress  is  well  done;  the  hands  are 
sooty,    probably    because    underbased    in    black, 
which  is  now  seen  coming  through  to  the  surface. 
The  face  has  an  unnatural  pallor,  perhaps  due  to 
old  repainting.    Not  a  remarkable  effort  for  Van 
der  Heist. 

170.  Hemessen,  Jan  van.  Isaac  and  Jacob.  The 
picture,  while  showing  some  strength  in  modelling, 
is  not  up  to  Hemessen's  average.  Nor  is  No.  169, 
in  the  same  room,  an  acceptable  Hemessen.  It  is 
dull  in  light. 

614.  Heyden,  Jan  van  der.  City  Park.  The  sky  is 
cold  but  the  buildings  and  trees  are  interesting 
in  their  detailed  drawing.  The  aerial  perspective 
and  light  are  excellent.  How  well  the  little  fig- 
ures, put  in,  it  is  said,  by  Adriaen  van  de  Velde, 
hold  their  places! 

570.  Hobbema,  Meindert.  Landscape.  The  only  ex- 
ample of  Hobbema  in  the  gallery,  and  this  one  not 
very  representative.  Warm  in  colour  and  light, 
due  to  underbasing  in  brown,  to  be  seen  notice- 
ably in  the  foliage  of  the  central  tree.  Even  the 
sky  and  clouds  have  it.  It  is  in  the  vein  and  style 
of  Ruisdael. 


HOLBEIN  THE  YOUNGER,  HANS  37 

209- 1  Holbein  the  Elder,  Hans.     St.  Sebastian  Altar- 

211  /  Piece.  By  no  means  so  skilled  as  the  work  of  the 
younger  Holbein,  but  it  is  good  work,  nevertheless. 
The  St.  Sebastian  is  carefully  drawn  against  a 
somewhat  mannered  tree,  and  the  soldiers  are 
grouped  about  this  white  centre  with  pictorial 
effect  if  not  with  realistic  truth.  The  landscape 
is  very  good.  The  St.  Barbara  at  the  left  is  a  fine 
figure  in  flowing  robes  and  with  winning  sentiment; 
the  St.  Elizabeth  at  the  right  is,  perhaps,  not  so 
attractive.  Both  of  them  remind  one  of  the  sculp- 
tured figures  on  the  outside  of  German  cathedrals 
of  the  fifteenth  century. 

193-1 Altar  Panels.     A  series  of  panels  hung  high 

208    J  on  the  wall,  and  possessing  somewhat  less  interest 

than,  say,  the  St.  Sebastian  Altar-Piece  (Nos.  209- 

211). 

213.  Holbein  the  Younger,  Hans.  Portrait  of  Sir 
Bryan  Take.  If  the  Death  and  the  hour-glass 
were  out  of  the  picture  there  would  be  a  gain  in 
simplicity.  The  portrait  is  not  in  Holbein's  best 
manner.  It  is  too  smooth  and  porcelain-like  in 
its  textures.  The  hot  face  loses  by  the  glitter  of 
the  sleeve  and  the  gold  chain.  The  work  is  prob- 
ably a  school  copy. 

1490.  Portrait  of  Derick  Berck.  Notice  the  heavi- 
ness of  the  brush  in  the  hair  and  beard,  the  yellow 
shadows  on  the  face  and  hands,  the  uncertain  out- 
lines of  the  head  and  shoulders.  It  has,  in  the 
head,  the  cramped  look  of  a  copy.  It  is  not  by 
Holbein's  hand. 

212.    Portrait  of  Derick  Born.     A  handsome  little 

portrait,  done  with  good  feeling  by  some  one  who 


38  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

knew  how  to  draw  and  paint;  but  the  reasons  for 
connecting  it  with  Holbein  are  not  very  apparent. 

151.  Isenbrant,  Adriaen.  Flight  into  Egypt.  Isen- 
brant  is  as  yet  only  a  name  upon  which  to  bestow 
pictures  that  will  not  fit  Gerard  David.  There  is 
not  a  single  well-authenticated  example  of  Isen- 
brant's  work  in  existence,  and  all  we  know  about 
him  is  the  record  that  he  was  a  pupil  of  David. 
This  picture  is  similar  in  theme,  type,  and  land- 
scape to  many  examples  found  in  European  gal- 
leries under  the  name  of  David,  or  Patinir,  notably 
at  Berlin  and  Vienna.  It  has  nice  feeling  and  the 
figure  is  well  placed  in  the  landscape. 

153.    Presentation.     The    attribution    again    is    a 

mere  guess,  though  the  picture  is  in  the  manner  of 
No.  151.  Only  a  few  years  ago  both  pictures  were 
assigned  to  Mostaert,  who  is  now  becoming  neb- 
ulous as  Isenbrant  swims  into  our  ken. 

426.  Janssens,  P.  Elinga.  Woman  Reading.  There 
.-  are  quite  a  number  of  pictures  of  this  kind  and 
quality  in  European  galleries  under  the  name  of 
Pieter  de  Hooch.  The  director  of  the  gallery  here 
at  Munich  frankly  ascribes  this  example  to  De 
Hooch's  imitator,  Janssens.  It  does  not  improve 
a  canvas  to  have  a  great  name  falsely  attached  to  it. 
Yet  this  is  by  no  means  a  poor  picture.  On  the 
contrary,  the  light,  colour,  and  drawing  are  very 
good.  Notice  also  the  chairs,  trunk,  still-life, 
cloth  at  the  left.  And  how  well  the  seated  figure 
holds  its  place  in  the  room!  Even  the  picture- 
frames  on  the  wall  are  quite  right.  As  a  De  Hooch 
it  would  not  be  remarkable;  as  a  Janssens  it  is 
certainly  interesting.  Formerly  catalogued  as  a 
De  Hooch. 


LEONARDO  DA  VINCI  39 

813.    JordaetlS,    Jakob.     Satyr   with   Peasant   Family. 

tit  is  hot  in  the  flesh-notes  and  besides  is  somewhat 
hurt  and  patched.  A  variant  of  a  theme  repeated 
several  times  by  Jordaens.  See  notes  on  the  Brus- 
sels Gallery,  under  Jordaens. 

353.    Koninck,  Salomon.     Christ  in  the  Temple.    A 

Rembrandtesque  picture  that  has  done  service  as 
a  Rembrandt  in  the  past.  It  is  quite  as  good  if 
not  better  than  certain  pictures  of  the  kind  still 
ascribed  to  Rembrandt  in  the  European  galleries. 
The  grouping  is  excellent,  the  light  true,  the  atmos- 
phere good,  the  colour  very  fair.  It  has  more  qual- 
ity than  Koninck  usually  showed.  The  same  hand 
did  the  glittering  high  lights  and  pretty  whites 
in  The  Hague  picture,  No.  36,  and  in  several  other 
so-called  Rembrandts  at  London,  Amsterdam,  and 
Berlin.  It  is  strange  that  a  style  and  handling  so 
diametrically  opposed  to  that  of  Rembrandt  should, 
even  for  a  moment,  be  confused  or  mistaken  for 
the  master's  work.  See  The  Hague  notes  on  Rem- 
brandt. 

254- 1  Kulmbach,  Hans  von.  St.  Joseph  and  Other 
257  j  Saints.  These  panels  are  strong  in  their  colours 
contrasted  with  gold  grounds.  Besides,  they  are 
well  drawn  and  well  painted.  They  are -good  ex- 
amples of  early  German  art  and  should  be  looked  at 
carefully. 

1493.  Leonardo  da  Vinci.  Madonna  and  Child.  This 
picture  is  by  the  painter  of  No.  13  in  the  Dresden 
Gallery.  He  may  be  a  Fleming  following  Leonardo 
as  regards  the  Child,  the  yellow  drapery,  the  blue 
mountains,  and  following  Lorenzo  di  Credi  as  re- 
gards the  architectural  frame  at  the  back.  The 
flowers  and  vase  at  the  right  look  half  Flemish,  as 


40  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

also  the  Madonna's  head-dress  and  brooch.  The 
surface  is  a  bit  glassy  for  an  Italian  and  again  re- 
minds one  of  Flemish  surfaces.  The  Madonna's 
face  is  hurt  by  the  use  of  too  much  oil  or  varnish. 
Another  version  by  the  same  hand  in  the  Louvre 
(No.  1603A). 

148.  Leyden,  Lucas  van.    Madonna,  Child,  Magdalen, 

*  and  Joseph.     An  excellent  picture  that  might  be 
helped  by  a  more  suitable  frame.    The  gold  arches 
are  too  bright.     The  heads  and  hands  are  beauti- 
fully drawn  and  the  donor's  portrait  is  very  strong. 
The  Madonna  gives  an  odd  suggestion  of  Diirer. 
What  a  beautiful  transparent  head-dress  she  wears ! 
The  Magdalen  is  a  lovely  type  and  is  charmingly 
painted.     With  rich  colour  all  through  and  an  ef- 
fective landscape. 

149.    Annunciation.     A  wing  of  No.   148,  done  a 

*  little  harsher  but  with  sentiment  and  colour  both 
very  attractive.     How  easily  but  surely  this  painter 
handles  the  brush!     And  what  quality  he  gets  in 
his  whites  and  blues  and  pinks  that  ordinarily  lend 
themselves  to  mere  prettiness!    Notice  the  jar  of 
lilies  and  at  the  top  that  soaring  cherub  in  yellow 
placed  against  grey-blue.     Lucas  van  Leyden  is 
not  commonplace  whatever  else  he  may  or  may  not 
be.     And  this,  too,  in  spite  of  many  evidences  of 
restoration.     The  panel  was  sawn  away  from  No. 
148  and  injured  in  the  process. 

1495.  Liberale  da  Verona.  Pieta.  A  strong  piece  of 
hard  modelling  in  the  figure  of  the  Christ  and  in  the 
hands  and  faces  of  the  women.  How  chipped  and 
block-like  the  drawing  in  the  sleeve  of  St.  John! 
The  colour  is  as  strong  as  the  drawing  but  just  as  un- 
compromising and  positive.  Injured,  but  still  fine. 


LIPPI,  FRA  FILIPPO  41 

1496.    Licinio,  Bernardino.     Portrait  of  a  Woman.     It 

has  been  injured  by  cleaning  and  is  now  somewhat 
flattened.  The  colour  is  too  warm  in  the  flesh 
and  the  drawing  wants  in  accent  and  articulation. 
It  has  a  Giorgionesque  look  about  it. 

335 1  Lievens,  Jan.  Heads  of  Old  Men.  Two  por- 
336  J  trait  heads  that  show  Rembrandt  influence.  This 
artist  painted  a  number  of  Rembrandts  in  his  time, 
and  these  pictures  are  still  doing  Rembrandt  ser- 
vice in  galleries  and  art  histories.  His  portraits 
are  usually  marked  by  a  scratching  through  the 
wet  paint  noticeable  chiefly  in  the  hair  and  beard. 
See  The  Hague  notes  on  Rembrandt. 

1008.  Lippi,  Filippino.  Christ  Appearing  to  the  Ma- 
donna. A  large  but  not  very  attractive  picture. 
It  is  cold  in  colour  with  uneasy,  twisting  drapery 
and  constrained  action  in  the  figures.  The  land- 
scape is  cold,  too,  and  patchy  in  its  putting  together. 
The  sky  with  its  groups  hardly  improves  the  pic- 
ture, though  the  little  angel  of  the  Annunciation 
and  the  Madonna  (in  the  upper  corners)  are 
charming.  The  predella  is  more  modest  in  scheme 
but  perhaps  more  interesting  than  the  picture 
above  it.  The  attribution  is  questioned  by  some. 
Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle  thought  it  a  fine  example 
of  Filippino. 

1006.    Lippi,  Fra  Filippo.     Madonna  and  Child.     The 

figures  have  known  much  repainting.  The  nails  of 
the  hand  are  almost  obliterated  and  the  faces  are 
distorted  by  it.  Originally  a  charming  picture, 
plaintive  in  sentiment,  good  in  colour,  and  advanced 
in  landscape  knowledge  for  the  painter's  time. 
Notice  the  white  of  the  Florentine  head-dress. 
Above  the  Madonna's  head  is  a  halo  that  floats 


42  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

and  is  not  fastened  to  the  head,  as  in  earlier  work. 
With  gold  work  in  the  patterns  and  edges  of  the 
robe.  The  Madonna  type  is  supposed  to  be  that 
of  Lucretia  Buti. 

1005.   Annunciation.     The  drapery  under  the  angel 

is  formally  folded,  as  in  the  Berlin  picture  (No.  69), 
and  the  flowers  are  like  those  seen  in  all  this  painter's 
pictures,  but  frailer  and  paler.  The  angel  is,  per- 
haps, the  best  part  of  the  picture — a  very  lovely 
angel  in  feeling,  graceful  in  movement,  and  charm- 
ing in  colour.  The  Madonna  is  less  attractive  and 
the  architecture  and  garden  are  cold  and  crude  at 
present.  The  picture  is  much  hurt  by  repainting 
— in  the  Madonna,  the  dove,  and  the  architecture. 
An  early  work.  Attribution  disputed  by  some 
critics. 

986.  LippO  Memmi.  Assumption  of  the  Virgin.  Much 
restored,  but  with  traces  of  beauty  still  apparent, 
as  in  the  head,  hands,  and  robe  of  the  Madonna, 
for  instance.  Venturi  thinks  it  a  modern  copy. 

5.    Lochner,   Stephen.     Madonna  in  Rose   Garden. 

Notice  the  little  angels  with  the  flowers  and  the 
plaintive  Madonna  with  an  ill-drawn  head  and 
questionable  nether  limbs.  What  good  colour  as 
well  as  sentiment!  Art  is  not  wholly  a  matter  of 
correct  drawing.  Colour  counts  for  much  and 
spirit  or  feeling  for  more. 

3  "\ Altar  Wings.    With  three  saints  in  each  panel 

4  J  and  kneeling  donors  below.     The  men  are  dignified 

and  the  women  have  charm.  The  garments  are 
better  drawn  than  the  figures.  What  romantic 
types,  costumes,  sentiment,  feeling!  The  red  notes 
are  washed  out  in  the  high  lights  as  also,  in  mea- 
sure, the  greens.  There  are  green  shadows  on  the 


MARCONI,  ROCCO  43 

hands  and  faces  in  No.  4.  The  panels  are  very 
effective  as  decoration,  entirely  aside  from  their 
sentiment  or  content. 

6.    Lochner,    School    of.     Death    of   the   Madonna. 

These  panels,  such  as  Nos.  6  and  8,  put  down  to 
the  School  of  Lochner,  are  excellent  in  gold  work, 
patterns,  and  colour.  They  are  by  no  means  in- 
ferior because  placed  under  the  caption:  "  School  of 
Lochner."  Their  decorative  value  is  considerable. 

1083.    Lotto,     Lorenzo.     Marriage     of    St.     Catherine. 

The  St.  Catherine  and  the  Child  are  charming  in 
sentiment  and  very  graceful  in  their  attitudes. 
The  action  of  the  group  centres  in  the  play  of  hands, 
as  so  often  in  Lotto's  conversation  pieces.  The 
colour  is  rather  high  in  key  and  the  landscape  is 
attractive.  An  early  Lotto  and  not  very  strong 
in  drawing,  but  it  is  sufficient. 

192.    Maler  von  Ulm,  Hans.    Portrait  of  Ronner.    A 

good  portrait,  now  somewhat  repainted.  It  has 
character  and  colour.  The  painter  is  usually  re- 
ferred to  as  Hans  Maler  zu  Schwaz.  He  is  sup- 
posed to  have  been  influenced  by  Strigel  and  Burgk- 
mair.  Little  is  known  about  him. 

1085.    Marconi,  ROCCO.     St.  Nicholas  and  Two  Saints. 

The  saint  at  the  right  with  a  cross  suggests  a  Fer- 
rarese  painter  near  to  Dossi,  but  the  St.  Nicholas  is 
certainly  suggestive  of  Marconi.  The  picture  is 
rather  fine  in  the  colour  of  the  robes,  but  is  crude 
in  the  white  clouds  and  not  well  held  together  in 
light. 

Massys,  Quentin.    See  Metsys. 

Master  of  the  Death  of  the  Virgin.  See  Cleve, 
Juste  van. 


44  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

60- 1  Master  of  Frankfort.  Deposition.  Begin  with 
62  J  this  picture  by  studying  the  uniform  landscape 

*  in  all  three  panels  to  get  the  enclosure  or  setting. 
Then  come  down  into  the  foreground  and  see  how 
fairly  well  the  grouped  figures  belong  in  that  setting. 
In  early  art  this  is  a  technical  excellence  not  always 
seen  or  felt.  There  are  figures  in  fine  robes,  some- 
what uncouth  of  gesture  and  pose,  but  touched  by 
grief,  and  full  of  right  feeling.  The  donors  at  the 
sides  are  dignified,  and  their  patron  saints — the 
St.  Catherine,  for  instance — finely  poised  and  ex- 
cellent in  colour.  The  blue  robe  of  the  Madonna 
is  not  quite  the  blue  of  Bouts,  but  then  there  was 
only  one  Bouts  in  art. 

10.  Master  of  the  Heisterbach  Altar.  5*.  Bernard 
with  Saints.  This  and  the  altar-piece,  No.  9,  give 
an  excellent  idea  of  the  ornate  character  of  early 
German  church  art.  As  decoration,  quite  aside 
from  representation,  the  pieces  are  excellent  in 
their  gold  work.  The  painter  takes  his  name  from 
these  pictures. 

43.  Master  of  the  Kinsfolk  of  the  Virgin.  The 
Circumcision.  A  triptych,  with  three  men-saints 
at  left,  and  three  women-saints  at  right.  Very 
carefully  done  and  with  good  colour  effect.  The 
drawing  is  decidedly  linear  and  angular,  but  effec- 
tive. Notice  the  brocades  in  the  central  panel  and 
the  right  wing;  also  the  attractive  group  of  angels 
in  landscape  at  left,  and  the  little  Adoration  so 
fine  in  colour  in  the  upper  right-hand  corner.  The 
name  of  the  painter  derives  from  his  picture  in  the 
Cologne  Museum,  showing  the  Kinsfolk  (Parenti, 
Sippe)  of  the  Virgin. 

26.    Master  of  the  Life  of  the  Virgin.    Annunda- 

*      tion.    Just  as  true  in  its  religious  feeling  as  any 


MASTER  OF  THE  LIFE  OF  THE  VIRGIN       45 

Italian  picture  ever  painted.  And  what  a  decora- 
tive effect  is  here,  with  rich  colours  placed  upon  a 
gold  ground!  Notice  the  fine  colour  of  the  red  on 
the  bench  at  back,  and  its  happy  contrast  with  the 
green  cushions.  And  what  a  brocade  the  angel 
wears!  The  picture  is  slightly  repainted.  The 
set  of  pictures,  of  which  this  is  one,  was  originally 
put  down  to  the  Master  of  the  Ly  versberg  Passion, 
but  the  name  is  now  changed  to  the  Master  of  the 
Life  of  the  Virgin,  as  more  appropriate.  The 
name  of  the  painter  derives  from  this  series  of  pic- 
tures. He  is  supposed  to  be  identical  with  Johann 
van  Duyren.  Some  influence  of  Bouts  is  appar- 
ent in  his  pictures.  There  are  figures  on  the  re- 
verse of  the  panels. 

28.    Assumption  of  the  Virgin.    It  is  well  composed 

*  and  simply  done,  but  it  has  not  quite  the  quality 
of  No.  26.     Notice  the  drawing  of  the  feet  and 
hands,  the  strong  faces  of  the  apostles,  the  blue 
cherubim,  and  the  lovely  Madonna. 

23.   Birth  of  the  Virgin.     Somewhat  injured  by 

cleaning  and  repainting.  The  colour  lacks  in  qual- 
ity. It  is  too  chalky  in  the  faces  and  draperies, 
and  a  little  frail  in  the  blues  and  greens  compared 
with  No.  26.  But  the  general  effect  is  the  same  as 
in  the  other  panels  of  the  series. 

27.   Visitation.    A  very  good  early  landscape  that 

*  seems  to  fit  well  into  the  gold  sky.     The  gold  is 
high  in  value,  high  enough,  almost,  to  create  the 
effect  of  a  yellow  sky.     The  figures  are  awkward 
and  angular,  but  they  are  very  true  and  sincere 
people.    There  are  blue  cherubim  against  the  gold, 
and  at  the  left  (to  balance  the  maid  with  the  wooden 
slippers)  a  donor  kneeling  and,  close  by,  his  coat 


46  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

of  arms.     Notice  the  architecture  of  the  city  at 
the  back. 

24.    Presentation  of    the    Virgin    in    the    Temple. 

*  The  little  figure  of  the  Virgin  going  up  the  steps 
is  almost  angelic.  How  she  bears  herself  and  how 
beautifully  her  drapery  falls!  And  what  a  colour 
effect  in  the  figures  at  the  right!  What  a  fine  pres- 
ence that  of  the  young  man  with  the  golden  hair  I 
Notice  also  the  woman  in  green  at  the  left.  This 
is  one  of  the  best  of  the  series  by  this  master.  It  is 
a  very  interesting  series,  including  Nos.  22  and  25, 
which  are  less  interesting  only  by  comparison  with 
the  others.  The  various  panels  are  parts  of  an 
altar-piece,  and  have  depicted  on  their  backs  the 
Coronation  and  the  Crucifixion.  These  backs  are 
in  better  condition  than  the  fronts,  being  freer 
from  repainting.  One  panel  of  the  series  is  in  the 
National  Gallery,  London  (No.  706). 

1505.  Master  Of  Moulins.  Portrait  of  Cardinal  Karl 
von  Bourbon.  A  sharply  outlined  portrait,  but 
a  good,  strong  one,  nevertheless.  The  ear  is  placed 
low,  and  is  what  Lombroso  would  style  a  criminal 
ear,  whereas  the  Autun  Nativity  by  the  Master  of 
Moulins  shows  extraordinarily  high-placed  ears, 
following  Van  der  Goes,  by  whom  he  was  supposed 
to  have  been  influenced.  In  other  respects  this 
portrait  corresponds  closely  enough  with  work  at- 
tributed to  the  Master  of  Moulins — identified  by 
some  critics  with  Jean  Perreal.  The  background 
is  rich  in  carving  and  brocades.  Somewhat  re- 
painted in  the  white  robe  and  elsewhere. 

48- 1  Master  of  St.  Bartholomew  Altar.     Triptych. 

50    J  The  screen,  the  formal  placing  of  the  figures,  the 
figures  themselves  are  all  a  little  odd  to  modern 


MEMLING,  HANS  47 

eyes;  but  look  closely  at  the  work — the  heads, 
hair,  robes,  patterns — and  the  skill  and  beauty 
shown  must  become  apparent  to  you. 

41 1  Master  of  St.  Severin.  Christ  on  the  Mount 
42  J  and  Deposition.  Two  panels  from  an  altar-piece, 
with  almost  grotesque  types  in  No.  41;  but  with 
good  drawing  and  feeling.  In  No.  42  the  landscape 
is  interesting.  The  painter  is  named  from  his 
panels  in  the  chapel  of  St.  Severin,  Cologne. 

1.    Master    Wilhelm    of    Cologne.    St.    Veronica. 

Look  at  it  a  moment  for  early  art.  How  very  well 
done  the  head  of  the  Saint,  the  little  angels,  the 
gold  rays  of  light!  With  what  fine  feeling  all  these 
early  men  worked!  They  aspired  to  craftsman- 
ship first  of  all,  but  they  wrought  with  a  sad 
sincerity. 

1508.  Mazo,  Juan  Battista.  Portrait  of  the  Counf- 
Duke  of  Olivares.  A  small  studio  replica  of  the 
large  Velasquez  portrait  at  Madrid  (No.  1181). 
There  are  a  number  of  changes  and  differences — 
for  instance,  the  horse  being  white  here  and  bay 
there.  That  Mazo  made  the  replica  is  not  so 
certain.  He  painted  in  a  more  sombre  key  of 
light,  and  with  a  more  careless  brush  than  shows 
here.  The  picture  is,  however,  near  him. 
116.  Memling,  Hans.  The  Seven  Joys  of  the  Virgin. 
A  long,  panoramic  picture  telling  the  stories  or 
scenes  in  the  life  of  Mary,  with  the  result  of  having 
many  different  points  of  sight  and  many  different 
pictures  on  one  panel.  There  is  a  disjointed  effect 
as  a  result.  The  picture  is  not  well  held  together 
because  of  a  lack  of  centralised  grouping.  But  in 
detail  it  is  excellent — in  the  figures,  the  prancing 
horses,  the  bright  colours  rather  than  colour,  and  the 


48  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

fine  landscape.  How  the  horses  push  forward  in 
the  procession  to  Calvary!  What  splendid  cos- 
tumes the  riders  wear;  what  armour,  flags,  fine 
robes!  Of  course  it  lacks  aerial  perspective  and 
wants  in  envelope  as  well  as  in  continuity;  but  it 
may  be  studied  in  the  parts  with  both  pleasure  and 
profit.  Not  the  best  example  of  Memling,  however. 
115.  John  the  Baptist.  This  little  panel  holds  to- 
gether much  better  than  the  larger  No.  116,  be- 
cause of  its  one  subject.  The  colour  of  the  robe,  as 
well  as  the  figure  under  it,  are  excellent,  as  is  also 
the  landscape.  Originally  part  of  a  diptych.  It 
has  the  false  signature  of  Hugo  van  der  Goes  upon 
it.  Supposed  to  have  been  painted  about  1472. 

424.    MetSU,  Gabriel.      The  Bean-King's  Feast.     It  is 

signed  below  on  the  child's  chair,  but  for  all  that 
it  may  not  be  by  Metsu.  It  seems  too  broad  in 
the  handling  and  composition  for  him,  though  at 
times  he  approximated  such  work.  Moreover,  it 
is  not  exact  enough  in  drawing.  It  rambles  consid- 
erably. The  catalogue  says  an  early  work,  which 
makes  the  matter  somewhat  more  difficult  to  un- 
derstand. It  is  good  in  colour  at  the  right  side 
only.  The  left  side  rather  falls  out  and  is  disap- 
pointing. Notice  the  woman  and  child — the  best 
part  of  the  picture. 

677.  Momper  the  Younger,  Joos  de.  Landscape. 
The  foreground  and  background  are  not  in  the 
same  tone  of  colour  or  light,  not  in  harmony  or 
keeping.  But  an  interesting  landscape  with  some 
force  about  it — perhaps  the  force  of  sharp  contrast. 

1123.    Moretto  da  Brescia    (Alessandro  Bonvicino). 

*         Portrait  of  a  Churchman.     It  gives  one  not  a  large 

idea  of  Moretto,  though  it  has  a  grey  look  about 


NEER,  AART  VAN  DER  49 

it  that  resembles  Moretto's  silvery  tone.  Formerly 
ascribed  to  Moroni,  where  it  hardly  belonged.  An 
interesting  portrait,  well  drawn,  especially  in  the 
hands,  and  well  placed  upon  the  canvas  for  dec- 
orative effect  in  connection  with  the  rather  pro- 
nounced interior  at  back.  It  has  grip  and  char- 
acter about  it. 

1515.  Muelich,  Hans.  Albert  V  of  Bavaria.  There  is 
a  striving  for  a  rich,  decorative  effect  in  the  back- 
ground, in  the  costume,  in  the  chains  and  ornaments, 
with  the  result  that  the  interest  in  the  face  is  weak- 
ened. It  is  not  of  Holbein  quality  though  a  truth- 
ful and  exact  portrait.  Placed  high  on  the  panel, 
which  gives  height  to  the  figure,  and  with  it  dignity. 

301  1  Portraits  of  Ligsalz  and  Wife.     The  woman's 

302  /  portrait  is  the  more  interesting  of  the  two.     It  is, 

in  fact,  an  unusual  effect  in  portraiture — something 
seen  occasionally  in  the  kneeling  donors  of  an  altar- 
piece  but  seldom  as  a  simple  portrait.  How  well 
the  blacks  and  whites  are  related  to  the  green 
curtain  and  the  sky!  The  man's  portrait  is  more 
perfunctory.  Coats  of  arms  are  on  the  backs  of 
the  panels. 

1304- }  Murillo,  BartolomS  Esteban.     Street  Urchins. 

1308  J  A  series  of  street-arab,  beggar-boy  pictures  of 
which  No.  1304  is  probably  as  good  as  any.  They 
are  much  admired,  but  they  do  not  wear  well, 
and,  after  many  seeings,  become  commonplace  and 
wearisome.  They  are  all  wanting  in  colour,  but 
are  rather  carefully  drawn  for  Murillo.  There  is 
no  smack  of  genius  in  them,  however,  nor  even 
a  sense  of  decoration.  Done  about  1650. 

1518.  Neer,  Aart  van  der.  Landscape  with  Sunset. 
A  picture  that  in  colour  reminds  one  of  an  early 


50  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

Rousseau.  It  makes  a  fine  glow  on  the  wall, 
which  is  to  say  that  it  is  decorative — something 
that  is  largely  the  mission  of  any  art,  modern  or 
ancient. 

435.    Neer,  Eglon  Hendrik  van  der.    Lady  with  Lute. 

This  belongs  with  the  work  of  Netscher  and  Van  der 
Werff — pretty  and  popular  art.  It  is  a  long  hark 
from  them  to  such  painters  as  Terborch  and  Ver- 
meer  of  Delft. 

133.  Orley,  Bernard  van.  Portrait  of  Jehan  Caron- 
delet.  It  looks  like  an  inferior  Holbein.  The 
sleeve  is  wooden,  the  Jiands  and  head  hard,  the 
background  decorative,  as  in  the  portrait  of  Zelle, 
in  the  Brussels  Gallery  (No.  334),  with  which  it 
seems  in  agreement.  There  is  little  doubt  that 
Van  Orley  painted  it. 

157.    Preaching  of  St.  Norbert.     The  arrangement 

of  the  blues  and  reds  under  light  and  shade  is  effec- 
tive, and  the  figures  are  drawn  with  some  vigour. 
The  landscape  does  not  recede.  It  is  a  wing  from 
a  triptych  and  has  figures  in  grisaille  on  the  back. 

370.  Ostade,  Adriaen  van.  Happy  Peasants.  A  num- 
ber of  Ostades  are  in  this  gallery,  but  none  of  them 
is  of  remarkable  quality.  This  interior  has  well- 
grouped  figures,  and  a  good  atmospheric  setting. 

1058.    Pacchia,  Girolamo  del.      Madonna  with  Angels. 

Handsome  angel  faces  ranged  about  a  blue-cowled 
Madonna,  with  some  good  drawing  and  sentiment. 
The  colour  is  cool.  The  picture  is  a  little  injured. 

298.   Pacher,    Michael.    Altar   of  the   Four   Church 

*      Fathers.     This   large  altar-piece  has   been  much 

restored,  but  is  still  remarkably  decorative  in  the 

gold  patterns,  the  embroideries,  the  Gothic  archi- 


PALMA  VECCHIO  51 

lecture.  The  drawing  is  excellent  in  the  hands 
and  heads;  and  as  for  the  colouring,  it  still  has 
depth  and  strength  to  it.  The  wealth  of  detail 
everywhere  would  seem  to  argue  a  want  of  concen- 
trated carrying  power,  but  one  does  not  feel  this 
in  the  panels.  They  are  wrought  with  the  minute 
skill  of  a  goldsmith,  yet  hold  together  when  seen 
at  a  distance. 

298A.   Legend  of  St.    Wolfgang.     At  the  top   the 

architecture,  the  street,  the  sky,  the  figures  on  the 
bridge  should  be  noticed.  The  large  figures  of 
the  saint  are  well  done,  both  above  and  below. 
Notice  the  drawing  of  the  nude  figure  below.  A 
picture  of  force  by  a  painter  of  power. 

298s. Legend  of  St.  Wolfgang.     These  side  panels 

are  in  much  better  condition  than  the  central 
piece  and  are  very  striking.  Notice  the  kneel- 
ing saint  below,  with  the  angel,  and  at  the  right, 
through  the  door,  the  fine  little  landscape. 

1107.    Palma  Vecchio.      Portrait  of  the  Painter.      It  is 

possibly  by  Palma,  but  if  we  could  see  it  as  the 
painter  left  it  another  hand  might  be  revealed. 
It  has  been  scrubbed  to  death.  Notice  the  fore- 
head, cheek,  neck,  and  hands  for  their  flatness. 
The  picture  has  been  much  attributed.  See  the 
note  in  the  catalogue  for  the  different  opinions 
regarding  it. 

1094.    Young  Satyr  Playing  on  a  Syrinx.     It  has  a 

nice  spirit  or  feeling.  The  figure  is  very  fine,  the 
colour  cool,  and  the  light-and-shade  excellent. 
There  are  those  who  think  it  a  little  gem  in  paint- 
ing, and  not  without  some  reason.  The  picture  has 
been  variously  ascribed  (with  a  war  of  words)  to  Cor- 


52  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

reggio,  to  Lotto,  to  Palma,  to  Titian,  but  it  does 
not  seem  of  that  large  importance  to  warrant  all 
the  pother  that  has  been  made  about  it.  Lotto  or 
Palma,  or  even  a  less  talented  Venetian  might  have 
done  it  without  startling  the  Venetian  art  world, 
though  it  has  charm  and  life. 

1108.  Madonna,  Child,  St.  Roch,  and  the  Mag- 
dalen. It  seems  an  empty,  airless,  and  soulless 
Palma.  The  sky  and  hills  are  not  more  crude  than 
the  Madonna  and  Child.  St.  Roch  kneels  fairly 
well  and  with  some  sense  of  reality  in  his  move- 
ments. Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle  praise  the  colour, 
but  one  wonders  how  or  why.  There  has  been 
repainting — as  usual.  Formerly  attributed  to  Paris 
Bordone. 

1026.  Palmezzano,  Marco.  Madonna  Enthroned  with 
Saints.  It  is  the  long-winded  effort  of  a  man  who 
was  limited  enough  when  he  undertook  small  pic- 
tures. He  was  never  quite  equal  to  the  needs  of 
the  large  canvas.  Here  the  composition  is  a  formal 
placing  of  people  and  pilasters,  with  the  broken 
line  used  everywhere — in  the  draperies  and  angles 
of  the  architecture  especially.  The  little  angel  at 
the  bottom  is  too  much  drawn  out. 

1034.    Perugino,    Pietro.     Vision    of  St.    Bernard.     A 

**  very  beautiful  Perugino  in  almost  every  respect. 
The  sentiment  is  (for  Umbria)  just  right.  It  is 
in  the  silent  landscape,  with  its  fragile  trees  and 
pure  sky,  as  well  as  in  the  tranquil  Madonna  and 
saints.  A  balanced  composition  simply  put  to- 
gether, but  with  unity  and  peace  in  its  parts.  The 
eye  naturally  falls  upon  the  Madonna,  then  upon 
St.  Bernard,  then  goes  to  the  saints  above  and 
to  the  landscape.  The  drapery  is  rightly  drawn, 


PLEYDENWURFF,  HANS  53 

without  breaks  or  catches  in  it,  and  the  hands 
and  faces  are  clearly  and  purely  done.  Just  so 
with  the  simple  but  beautifully  curved  and  pro- 
portioned arches  and  columns  or  the  well-drawn 
prie-dieu.  What  charming  colour!  Altogether  this 
is  a  masterpiece — one  of  the  best  of  Perugino's.  In 
its  original  setting,  no  doubt  the  chapel  architec- 
ture helped  out  the  architecture  here  shown.  A 
little  hurt. 

[035.  Madonna  with  Saints.  Not  so  restful  in  com- 
position or  so  fine  in  quality  as  No.  1034.  The 
drapery  has  more  "eyes"  in  it  than  No.  1034,  the 
figures  are  more  mannered,  and  the  lines  of  drap- 
ery flow  in  curves  with  more  conscious  striving  for 
effects  of  grace.  It  is  a  late  work  and  the  type 
is  a  little  elongated  in  both  face  and  figure.  The 
colour  is  simple  and  the  landscape  is  little  more 
than  indicated.  Too  much  cleaned. 

L037.   Perugino,  School  of.     Baptism  of  Christ.     It  is 

possibly  by  Lo  Spagna  or  some  one  very  close  to 
him.  It  might  be  compared  with  the  Lo  Spagna 
in  the  National  Gallery,  London  (No.  1032).  The 
same  painter  probably  did  No.  1038  also,  of  which 
there  is  another  version  under  the  name  of  Perugino 
in  the  Metropolitan  Museum  in  New  York.  In- 
jured. 

233.  Pleydenwurff,  Hans.  Crucifixion.  The  bright 
gold  ground  of  the  sky  hurts  the  picture.  The 
figures  are  well  brought  together  and  the  landscape 
keeps  its  place.  The  colour  also  is  agreeable  in  a 
scheme  of  warm  reds  tempered  by  greens  and  dull 
blues.  The  types  are  a  little  coarse  and  the  draw- 
ing is  sharp  in  contours  and  drapery.  St.  John 
and  the  three  women  are  effective. 


54  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

472.  Potter,  Paulus.  Cattle  Near  a  Hut.  The  work 
is  dry  and  wiry  in  its  painting  but  is  fairly  good 
in  its  drawing.  The  hardness  of  the  sheep  and  trees 
is  noticeable.  It  is  neither  better  nor  worse  than 
Potter's  poor  average. 

1049.  Raphael    Sanzio.      The   Canigiani  Madonna.     A 

**  very  charming  Raphael,  serene  in  spirit,  and  above 
reproach  in  the  manner  of  its  presentation.  It 
is  now  a  pyramidal  composition,  though  the  panel 
was  higher  originally  and  with  a  group  of  angels 
in  the  sky.  The  straight  lines  of  the  pyramid 
are  broken  by  the  round  lines  of  the  two  women 
forming  an  oval  at  the  centre  and  base  of  the 
pyramid.  It  has  a  hint  of  Andrea  del  Sarto  in  it 
— especially  in  the  St.  Anne  and  the  St.  John.  It 
is  beautifully  drawn,  the  figures  are  graceful,  and 
the  draperies  fall  just  right.  Notice  the  form  of 
the  Madonna  under  the  drapery,  and  the  contours 
of  her  face,  throat,  and  shoulders.  In  colour  it  is 
not  remarkable  in  either  bright  or  deep  hues,  but 
is  harmonious  save  for  the  blue  which  seems,  per- 
haps, too  high  in  key.  The  landscape  is  delight- 
ful in  the  feeling  of  space.  A  serene  picture,  cer- 
tainly designed  by  Raphael  though  perhaps  painted 
upon  by  pupils.  It  has  also  been  repainted  upon 
by  perhaps  more  than  one  restorer. 

1050.    The     Tempi    Madonna.      It    belongs    to    the 

painter's  Florentine  period.     The  type  and  colour 
are  not  now  Peruginesque,  but  more  like  Fra  Bar- 
tolommeo,  and  not  very  different  from  the  Madonna 
del  Granduca.     The  landscape  also  has  changed 
and  become  more  blue-green.     A  picture  with  good 
sentiment  and  spirit.   How  well  the  Madonna  clasps 
the  Child!    The  surface  is  stained  and  somewhat 


REICHLICH,  MARX  55 

repainted  in  spots  and  the  drawing  is  hurt  thereby. 
The  colour  is  a  little  cool. 

1051.    Madonna  delta  Tenda.    This  picture  is  adapted 

from  the  Madonna  della  Sedia  in  the  Pitti  Gallery. 
It  has  the  same  type  of  Child  and  the  same  round 
composition,  but  the  space  is  not  so  well  filled  as 
in  the  Florentine  picture.  Still  it  is  not  poorly  com- 
posed or  drawn,  save  in  the  Madonna's  arm,  and 
the  colour  is  rather  good.  Hurt  by  cleaning  and 
by  old  repainting,  as  in  the  hand  of  the  Madonna, 
where  the  drawing  and  modelling  seem  badly 
wrecked.  Attributed  by  various  critics  to  Alfani, 
Perino  del  Vaga,  and  Giulio  Romano.  It  is  Raph- 
aelesque  but  not  by  Raphael. 

[  320.  Ravesteyn,  Jan  Anthonisz  van.  Portrait  of  a 
Woman  in  Black.  The  ruff  hangs  like  a  mill- 
stone around  the  lady's  neck,  and  rather  disturbs 
the  otherwise  very  respectable  portrait.  The  com- 
panion picture,  No.  319,  is  better. 

1543-  \  Reichllch,  Marx.  Altar-Piece  of  Sts.  James 
1543s  }  and  Stephen.  Stop  a  moment  and  look  at  the 
*  goldsmith  quality  of  the  work  upon  these  embroi- 
dered robes.  The  charm  and  the  pathos  of  the 
little  figures  in  the  niches  of  the  architectural 
framing,  especially  the  women,  are  also  noteworthy. 
The  stoning  of  Stephen  at  the  right  (No.  1543A) 
is  brutal  but  the  landscape  is  pleasing.  The  panel 
above  it  is  good  in  colour,  in  the  drawing  of  the 
robes,  in  the  strong  faces.  The  panel  at  the  left, 
with  the  foreshortened  saint  on  the  slab  and  the 
tall,  handsomely  gowned  women  at  the  right,  has 
interest  not  only  for  the  foreshortened  figure  but 
for  the  foreshortened  oxen  and  the  landscape. 


56  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

324.  Rembrandt  van  Ryn.  Holy  Family.  The  hands 
of  the  Madonna  are  more  in  Rembrandt's  man- 
ner than  any  other  portion  of  the  picture,  and 
the  wrists  have  the  demarkation  line  of  tan  upon 
them,  as  in  the  Portrait  of  an  Architect  (No.  246) 
at  Cassel;  but  even  in  these  features  the  work  of 
a  pupil  or  follower  is  seen  rather  than  the  hand 
of  the  master.  The  colour,  the  drawing,  the  light- 
and-shade,  the  handling  are  all  wanting  in  positive 
Rembrandt  quality.  They  are  more  like  Bol's 
work.  The  picture  is  an  interesting  one,  but  it 
does  not  agree  with  the  Coppenol  at  Cassel  or 
the  Lesson  in  Anatomy  at  The  Hague,  both  of 
them  supposed  to  have  been  painted  in  the  same 
year  with  this  Holy  Family.  And  how  positively 
all  three  of  them  disagree  with  the  Rape  of  Proser- 
pina, and  the  Rape  of  Europa  at  Berlin  and  the 
Simeon  in  the  Temple  at  The  Hague!  What  a 
very  versatile  man  Rembrandt  must  have  been 
to  have  painted  all  these  contradictory  and  conflict- 
ing pictures  within  a  few  months!  The  head  of 
Joseph  is  well  done,  and  no  part  of  the  picture  is 
badly  done,  but  it  is  not  of  Rembrandt's  doing. 

332.  Sacrifice  of  Isaac.  It  has  not  the  certainty 

of  Rembrandt  in  its  drawing,  modelling,  or  han- 
dling. And  it  is  much  more  pallid  and  scattered  in 
illumination  than  is  usually  apparent  in  Rem- 
brandt's works.  The  trees  and  leaves  at  the  right 
are  not  drawn,  the  ram  is  a  perfunctory  stage 
property,  the  distance  is  carelessly  given.  The 
painting  of  the  hair  and  beard  of  Abraham,  the 
wrinkles  on  the  forehead,  the  drawing  of  the  eyes 
are  all  Rembrandtesque,  but  in  the  dull  way  of 
an  imitator  rather  than  the  originator.  Like  No. 
324,  it  lacks  Rembrandt's  colour  and  quality.  It 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  57 

is  a  school  picture,  but  a  good  picture  in  itself. 
The  action  is  effectively  given,  and  the  pressure  of 
that  enormous  hand  over  the  face  of  Isaac,  the 
writhe  and  struggle  of  the  boy's  body,  the  pres- 
ence of  a  real  body,  even  though  badly  drawn,  are 
all  positively  done.  Another  version  in  the  Her- 
mitage, St.  Petersburg.  This  Munich  picture  is 
declared  to  be  a  school  copy  and  the  St.  Peters- 
burg picture  the  original,  but  there  is  little  differ- 
ence between  them.  They  are  both  by  some  Rem- 
brandt pupil.  The  Munich  picture  was  once 
thought  by  Bol  and  then  by  Eeckhout.  The  model 
for  Abraham  is  the  same  as  No.  231  at  Cassel — a 
picture  done  probably  by  Lievens. 

325.   Portrait  of  a    Turk.     This  is  certainly  strong 

*  enough  for  Rembrandt.  In  fact,  that  is  the  trouble 
with  it.  It  is  too  strong.  The  head  is,  perhaps, 
over-modelled  by  the  insistence  upon  the  high  lights, 
and,  as  a  result,  it  comes  forward  out  of  the  canvas. 
That  was  something  that  Rembrandt  was  usually 
not  guilty  of.  He  made  his  heads  and  figures 
stand  in  instead  of  out,  and  he  surrounded  them  by 
light,  shadow,  and  air.  However,  there  is  little 
use  in  cavilling  over  a  head  so  powerfully  con- 
structed and  decisively  painted  as  this.  By  con- 
trast with  the  usual  examples  of  the  Eeckhouts, 
Konincks,  and  Victoors  set  down  to  Rembrandt 
it  is  a  wonder.  Notice  the  sureness  of  touch  in 
the  head-dress.  The  eyes  are  strong,  the  beard 
less  satisfactory,  the  mouth  weak,  the  hand  flabby. 
It  contradicts  other  Rembrandt  pictures  done  at 
this  period,  and  must  for  the  present  be  set  down  as 
a  work  by  Flinck.  The  same  painter  did  the  so- 
called  Saskia,  formerly  in  the  Josephs  Collection, 
London — another  fine  portrait;  also  the  Old  Man 


58  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

(No.  1600)  in  the  Dresden  Gallery,  put  down  to 
Flinck;   also  the  Amsterdam  Flinck,  No.  919. 

326.   The    Deposition.     This    and    the    five    other 

*  pictures  of  the  Passion  series  in  this  gallery  were 
painted  at   different  times   for   Prince  Frederick 
Henry  of  the  Netherlands.     It  is  evident  from  the 
pictures  themselves  that  Rembrandt  was  helped 
by  pupils  in  some  of  them.     At  first  his  own  hand 
is  more  prominent,  as  in  the  Deposition.    The 
light  is  centralised  upon  the  white  body  relieved 
upon  the  white  sheet.     The  weight  or  drag-down 
of  the  body  is  well  given.     The  grey  light  and  the 

3  s1:  cool  colour  are  harmonious.  The  composition  and 
drawing  are  very  satisfactory.  It  is  a  fine  picture. 
And  done  with  no  insistence  upon  glittering  high 
lights. 

327.   Raising   of  the    Cross.     The   rigid,    tortured 

*  body  is  beautifully  portrayed.     The  long,  diagonal 
line  of  the  figure  of  Christ  is  supplemented  by 
the  arms  and  the  back  of  the  figure  in  armour  and 
repeated  by  the  handle  of  the  spade.    This  to 
give  strength  to  the  main  line,  and  to  help  out  the 
feeling  of  weight  and  drag  downward  of  the  figure 
on  the  cross.     The  head  of  the  man  in  blue  near 
the  feet  looks  like  Rembrandt's  own  portrait  or 
what  we  have  accepted  as  a  Rembrandt  likeness. 
Notice  the  realistic  quality  of  the  man  in  armour 
dragging  at  the  cross,  the  nails  in  the  hands  and 
feet,  the  grouping  of  the  crowd  at  the  back.     It 
should  also  be  noticed  that  this  picture  and  No. 
326  are  small-figured  pictures,  done  about  1633, 
and  that  they  are  absolutely  different  in  concep- 
tion, composition,  types,  colour,  light-and-shade, 
and  handling  from  the  Rape  of  Proserpina  at  Berlin 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  59 

and  the  Simeon  in  the  Temple  at  The  Hague,  both 
of  them  supposedly  done  in  1631.  Rembrandt's 
mind  and  hand  must  have  undergone  sudden  and 
violent  changes  if  all  the  pictures  of  1631  attrib- 
uted to  him  are  genuine. 

328.   The  Ascension  of  Christ.    The  same  general 

*      scheme  of  centralised  light  thrown  on  the  figure  of 

Christ  in  white  holds  here  as  in  the  other  pictures 
of  the  series.  This  figure  of  Christ  was  perhaps 
done  by  Rembrandt,  but  some  of  his  pupils  may 
have  worked  on  the  figures  of  the  angels  and  the 
people  below  as  well  as  the  tree  at  the  left.  The 
little  angels  are  very  attractive,  and  the  figure  of 
Christ  is  fine  in  poise,  in  action,  in  largeness  and 
fulness  of  drawing,  in  religious  f eeling. 

329.   The  Resurrection.    An  inscription  on  the  back 

says,  in  effect,  that  Rembrandt  created  this  picture 
and  P.  H.  Brinckmann  resuscitated  it   (that  is, 
restored  it)  in  1755.     The  latter  part  of  the  state- 
ment probably  accounts  for  the  angel's  face  being 
turned  into  a  paint  pie  and  compensation  offered 
therefor  by  putting  six  fingers  on  the  left  hand. 
In  general  character  it  is  not  unlike  the  other  pic- 
tures of  the  series.    The  work  at  the  left  is  Rem- 
brandtesque.     The   violence   and    confusion   pro- 
duced by  the  Christ  bursting  from  the  tomb  are 
well  given. 

330.   The  Entombment.  This  picture,  though  doubt- 
less planned  by  Rembrandt  and  showing  his  com- 
position, shows  very  plainly  the  work  of  a  different 
hand  or  hands  from  the  first-mentioned  pictures  of 
the  series.     Compare  the  drawing  of  the  heads  and 
hands,   the  types,   the   colours,  the  lighting,  the 
handling  with,  say,  No.  326.    It  is  poorer  work  all 


60  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

through.  The  dead  weight  of  the  body  in  its  white 
sheet  is  well  given.  The  picture  is  somewhat  in- 
jured, which  may  account  for  its  blackish  tone  in 
the  shadows. 

331.    Adoration  of  the  Shepherds.     This  is,  perhaps, 

the  least  interesting  picture  of  the  series,  as  it  is 
the  latest,  not  having  been  painted  until  1646.  It 
is  similar  in  conception  to  the  other  pictures,  and 
was,  no  doubt,  designed  by  Rembrandt  but  exe- 
cuted almost  entirely  by  pupils.  Notice  the  badly 
drawn  heads  of  the  shepherds  at  the  left  of  the 
Child,  the  scattered  lighting,  the  heavy  and  rather 
ineffectual  handling.  This  is  not  Rembrandt  in 
decline,  but  the  work  of  those  in  his  shop  who 
never  rose  to  any  height.  It  is  little  more  than  a 
school  piece. 

333.  Portrait  of  the  Painter.  It  is  probably  an  eigh- 
teenth-century portrait  made  up  from  Rembrandt 
recollections.  It  is  too  smooth  for  Rembrandt's 
painting  in  1654.  And  why  did  Rembrandt  always 
have  to  paint  himself  so  differently  each  time? 
Is  it  not  possible  that  his  pupils  could  have 
painted  him  and  the  difference  in  the  portraits 
be  simply  the  difference  in  points  of  view?  This 
question  continually  recurs  to  one  on  seeing  these 
so-called  Rembrandt  portraits  said  to  be  by  the 
painter  himself. 

345.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Man.     It  carries  with  it 

no  conviction  of  Rembrandt  as  its  painter.  The 
drawing  of  the  face,  the  outline  of  the  cheek,  nose, 
and  mouth  are  too  sharp  and  crude  for  Rembrandt. 
Nor  is  the  colour  his.  Formerly  it  passed  as  an 
Eeckhout  and  then  as  a  Fabritius.  It  is  by  some 
pupil  of  the  school,  probably  the  same  one  who 


ROMANO,  GIULIO  61 

did  the  Saul  and  David  at  The  Hague  (No.  621) 
and  the  Christ  before  Pilate  at  Budapest  (No.  368) 
—that  is,  Flinck. 

91.  Rhine  School  (Middle).  Portrait  of  Hans  von 
Melem.  Somewhat  sharp  in  outline  but  good  in 
flesh  colour.  It  has  character  and  force.  Notice 
the  carefully  drawn  hands.  The  reflection  in  the 
glass  does  not  help  the  portrait  in  any  way.  For- 
merly ascribed  to  Hans  von  Melem,  who  is  now  dis- 
covered to  be  only  the  sitter  and  not  the  painter. 

1511.   Nativity.    The  little  angels,  the  landscape,  the 

sheep,  the  very  formal  drawing  of  the  bricks  are 
all   very  naive   in   their  regularity.     What  good 
sentiment  and  good  colour!    The  gold  sky  helps 
the  decorative  effect  of  it. 

1512.   Adoration  of  Kings.    The  picture  has  been 

hurt  by  repainting  in  the  hands  and  faces.    The 
Child  has  become  a  small  monstrosity,  but  the 
colour  is  still  bright,  the  robes  and  their  gold  bor- 
ders are  rich,  and  off  in  the  distance  is  a  fine  sug- 
gestion of  landscape.     With  early  and  not  very 
realistic  landscape,  but  sufficient  for  a  background. 

1052.    Romano,    Giulio.     Portrait   of  a    Young   Man. 

Thought  by  some  to  be  a  portrait  of  Raphael,  by 
others  a  portrait  of  the  young  Bindo  Altoviti. 
Also  thought  to  have  been  painted  by  Raphael, 
by  Giulio  Romano,  by  Peruzzi,  by  Bacchiacca. 
In  spite  of  the  conflict  of  authorities,  it  is  not  a 
bad  portrait.  The  head  and  face  are  well  drawn, 
the  hand  a  little  doubtful.  The  scheme  of  colour 
is  made  up  of  blue,  yellow,  and  green.  No.  1087, 
put  down  to  Sebastiano  del  Piombo,  is  thought 
to  be  by  Giulio  Romano  also.  Unfortunately,  the 
picture  is  wrecked  by  repainting. 


62  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

724.  Rubens,  Peter  Paul.  Death  of  Seneca.  A  pic- 
ture much  looked  at  because  of  its  morbid  theme. 
The  figure  of  Seneca  was  taken  from  a  statue  of  a 
fisherman  (now  in  the  Louvre)  and  over-modelled 
and  distorted  in  the  taking.  An  early  Rubens 
and  not  brilliant  in  colour. 

726.    Martyrdom   of  St.   Lawrence.      The  composi- 
tion is  too  huddled  and  the  colour  too  hot.     It  is 
not  more  than  a  school  piece,  and  the  accessories 
are  divided  up  between  Snyders,   Seghers,   and 
Brueghel. 

727.    Rape  of  the  Daughters  of  Leucippus.     A  pop- 

*      ular  Rubens,  but,  in  spite  of  that,  a  fine  group  of 

figures  and  once  a  fine  piece  of  careful  drawing. 
~CZ-.  -  As  form  and  colour  it  is  still  acceptable.  How  well 
the  group  fills  the  canvas!  The  colour  gives  the 
glow  of  life  and  the  use  of  the  broken  line  gives 
action.  Somewhat  hurt  by  the  restoration  that, 
sooner  or  later,  comes  to  every  large  canvas.  After 
hanging  upon  the  wall  for  years,  the  canvas  sags 
and  breaks  with  its  own  weight.  Then  it  has  to 
be  relined,  the  breaks  patched  up  and  made  to 
match  the  original  painting  as  nearly  as  possible. 
Of  course  it  is  never  "as  good  as  new"  again. 
New  paint  cannot  be  made  to  match  old  paint. 
What  fine  types,  these  Flemish  women!  What 
backs  and  arms!  The  landscape  is  attributed  to 
Wildens  and  some  of  the  drawing  and  painting  to 
Van  Dyck.  The  bodies  of  the  horses  are  left 
largely  to  the  imagination,  but  their  heads  are 
spirited. 

728.    Children  and  Fruit.    There  is  not  now  a  stroke 

of  Rubens's  brush  to  be  seen  in  the  picture,  and 
probably  never  was.     It  is  a  school  piece  which  he 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  63 

may  have  inspired  but  never  executed.     Of  course 
it  is  popular,  being  more  or  less  pretty. 

729.    Madonna    and    Child.      Those    who    have    a 

grievance   against   Rubens   because   of   his   gross 
types,  what  have  they  to  say  about  this  Madonna 
and  Child?    Is  it  coarse,  gross,  earthly,  material, 
or  is  it  the  exuberant  Flemish  type  given  with 
some  delicacy?    The  hands  of  the  Madonna  are 
hurt  by  over-cleaning  and  the  Child's  body  by 
repainting  in  spots;  but  the  heads  and  faces  are, 
apparently,  not  injured.     At  least  they  are  close 
enough  to  Rubens's  flesh  painting  to  be  accepted 
as  showing  his  early  style.    The  picture  is  hurt  by 
the  arabesque  of  flowers  done  by  Brueghel.    They 
are  brilliant  and  beautiful  but  do  not  help.    Nor 
do  the  heavy  cherubs  that  surround  the  Madonna. 

730.   Diana  Sleeping.    The   figures   are   hurt   by 

cleaning  and  by  the  diagonal  cracking  of  the  wood. 
The  landscape  and  the  too-numerous  items  of  game 
distributed  about  are  supposed  to  have  been  done 
by  Brueghel  or  some  one  of  his  ilk.     The  entire 
picture  is  probably  the  work  of  assistants  in  the 
Rubens  shop. 

732.    Defeat  of    Sennacherib.     What    imagination 

and  invention  Rubens  has  I    What  a  hurry  and 
roar  and  tumult  of  battle!  '  Notice  the  movement, 
the  action,  the  firm  drawing,  the  sure,  swift  paint- 
ing.    An  early  picture,  but  Rubens  is  early  sure  of 
himself.   The  shadows  are  blackish,  as  in  No.  733. 

733.   The  Conversion  of  St.  Paul.     In  sort  a  com- 
panion piece  to  No.  732,  painted  about  the  same 
time  and  in  the  same  manner.     Both  pictures  are 
on  wood,  and  hence  the  surfaces  are  not  badly  in- 
jured.   Somewhat  black  in  the  shadows. 


64  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

734.   The  Lion  Hunt.     A  picture  eulogised  by  some, 

but   the  student  will  miss  little  if  he  passes  it 
unnoticed.     The  landscape  is  supposed  to  be  by 
Wildens,  the  animals  by  Snyders,  the  figures  by 
Van  Dyck,  and  just  where  Rubens  comes  in  is 
not  apparent.     He  is  not  now  to  be  recognised  in 
the  work,  though  he  probably  designed  it  originally. 

735.  — —  The   Great  Last  Judgment.     A  picture  done 
for  the  high  altar  of  the  Jesuit  Church  at  Neuberg 
and  now  painfully  out  of  place.     The  wonder  is 
that  with  so  large  a  composition  Rubens  could  do 
anything  at  all  worthy  of  art.     It  is  a  very  good  de- 
sign, being  in  the  form  of  an  enormous  oval  of 
figures  descending  at  the  right  and  ascending  at 
the  left.     Some  of  the  figures  (notably  the  seated 
woman  in  the  left-hand  lower  corner,  just  above 
the  skeleton  head)  are  excellent  in  drawing.     The 
colour  is  lacking  in  brilliancy  and  the  shadows  are 
blackish.    The  whole  picture  was  worked  upon  by 
pupils  and  is  now  much  restored. 

736. Fall  of  the  Angels.     It  is  probably  a  school 

piece — something  done  in  the  Rubens  picture  fac- 
tory, for  gain  rather  than  for  art.  The  catalogue 
recites  that  it  is  all  done  by  Rubens's  own  hand; 
but  the  surface  of  the  picture  denies  this.  Now 
much  repainted. 

737.    Fall  of  the  Damned.     Planned  with  a  good 

*  deal  of  care,  no  doubt,  but  not  an  interesting  com- 
position save  for  the  diagonal  fall  of  the  figures. 
The  nude  is  shown  in  all  possible  attitudes.  And 
there  is  a  terrific  power  about  the  downward  drive 
of  these  figures.  They  fall  like  rain  which  seems  to 
come  down  harder  when  seen  driving  in  diagonal 
lines.  But  the  colour  is  disagreeable  and  the  shad- 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  65 

ows  are  blackish.  There  is  power  in  the  drawing, 
but  it  seems  ill  bestowed  or  at  least  not  resultant 
in  any  fine  effect. 

The  Little  Last  Judgment.     The  smallest  and 

the  best-preserved  of  the  three  Judgment  pictures 
here  shown.  Known  as  the  Little  Last  Judgment. 
Many  of  the  figures  are  perfect  in  drawing.  Once 
more  it  is  a  rain  downward  of  figures;  but  notice 
also  the  upward  movement  of  the  saved  on  the 
left,  high  up — a  counter-current  in  contrast  to  the 
downward  movement  of  the  damned.  In  the  top 
centre  Christ  and  the  Madonna  in  repose.  This 
latter  part  was  added  later  by  Rubens.  The  colour 
is  good  but  the  blue  of  the  central  angel  is  violent. 
The  Rubens  brush-work  is  apparent  in  the  flesh, 
the  whites  of  drapery,  the  hair.  Dr.  Bode  thinks  it 
a  school  piece. 

The  Woman  of  the  Apocalypse.     Painted  for 

the  Church  of  Friesing  and  now  much  restored. 
It  was  never  a  good  example  of  Rubens.  In  all 
these  large  pictures  he  was  much  helped  by  pupils. 
They  are  workshop  pictures,  turned  out  with  skill, 
but  mechanical  in  spirit,  and  poor  in  quality. 

Adoration  of  the  Shepherds.     A  heavy  work, 

done  for  the  Jesuit  Church  of  fteuberg  in  1619. 
It  is  now  at  the  disadvantage  of  being  seen  out  of 
place,  though  it  was  never  more  than  a  perfunctory 
workshop  picture  done  largely  by  pupils.  Besides, 
so  much  of  it  is  now  restoration  that  one  can  only 
guess  at  its  origin.  Rubens,  no  doubt,  designed  it 
and  there  is  still  an  Italian  rush  of  angel  wings  at 
the  top;  but  for  the  rest  it  is  rather  empty.  No. 
741  belongs  in  the  same  class.  It  is  another  work- 
shop picture. 


66  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

742. Battle  of  the  Amazons.     A  marvellous  picture 

**  in  invention,  composition,  and  execution,  though 
probably  suggested  by  the  Raphael-designed  Battle 
of  Constantine  in  the  Vatican.  Here  the  great  art- 
ist shows  in  his  invention,  even  in  his  assimilation 
of  Raphael,  and  the  great  painter  can  be  seen  in 
every  brush  stroke.  What  a  hurly-burly  of  wav- 
ing, arching,  contrasted  and  repeated  lines  supple- 
mented by  allied,  opposed,  and  repeated  colours! 
Notice  the  fight  for  the  standard  on  the  bridge,  the 
fall  of  the  horses  at  the  right,  the  red-mantled 
Amazon  at  the  left,  the  arching  bridge  and  its 
contrast  in  the  concave  wave  at  the  right.  Through 
the  arch  of  the  bridge  in  the  distance  the  struggle 
goes  on — the  swing  of  all  the  figures  being  to  the 
right  save  for  the  back  current  in  the  wave  that 
seems  to  push  the  figures  under  the  bridge  to  the 
left.  Battle  pieces  are  not  usually  enjoyable  works, 
and  this  is  better  than  the  average  only  by  virtue 
of  its  supreme  action  and  execution.  Look  at  the 
surface  closely,  and  see  how  the  trained  hand  of 
Rubens  strikes  once  with  the  brush  and  has  no 
need  to  strike  again.  Every  touch  counts  and  re- 
veals a  truth  of  form  or  colour,  swiftly,  directly, 
surely.  Keep  this  surface  in  your  eye  when  examin- 
ing early  pictures  by  Rubens  and  you  will  not  be 
misled  by  school  pieces.  His  hand  gains  sweep  and 
breadth  later  on  but  never  loses  in  truth  and  force. 

744.    Samson  Taken  Prisoner.     It  has  every  indi- 
cation of  a  workshop  piece  with  perhaps  more  of 
Van  Dyck  in  it  than  Rubens.     It  might  be  com- 
pared with  the  same  subject  by  Van  Dyck  in  the 
Vienna  Gallery  (No.  1043). 

745.    Susanna  at  the  Bath.     It  has  been  badly  re- 
stored, or  was  badly  painted  originally,  and  whether 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  67 

it  was  done  by  Rubens  or  by  a  pupil  is  now  a  matter 
of  conjecture.  For  the  coarse  brush  stroke,  see  the 
back  of  the  woman  (where  the  fur  pelisse  meets 
it)  and  the  neck.  Also  the  right  hand  of  the  elder, 
the  tree  trunk  below  him,  the  trees  and  wall  in 
the  background.  It  is  all  over  the  picture.  Ru- 
bens never  painted  in  that  manner  but  his  follow- 
ers and  restorers  did. 

Christ    and    the    Penitent    Sinners.      Painted 

on  wood  and  in  a  fair  state  of  preservation.  No- 
tice the  brush  strokes  in  the  Magdalen's  hair  and 
also  the  hair  of  the  figure  with  the  cross  and  that 
of  the  Christ.  The  flesh-notes  are  also  fairly  well 
preserved.  What  a  piteous  figure  that  of  the  Mag- 
dalen! And  what  dignity  and  nobility  in  the 
Christ!  A  noble  picture,  though  an  early  example 
of  the  master,  and  possibly,  but  not  probably, 
worked  upon  by  pupils.  The  catalogue  says  it  is 
by  Rubens's  own  hand. 

Christ  on  the  Cross.     So  far  as  it  goes  it  is 

a  perfect  picture,  though  an  early  Rubens.  In 
mental  grasp  it  is  almost  a  sublime  conception 
of  the  Christ  on  the  Cross.  He  is  hanging  there  in 
the  dusk  of  night,  alone,  utterly  forsaken,  quite 
dead.  The  singleness  of  the  idea,  undisturbed  by 
any  accessory  thought,  makes  it  startling,  power- 
ful, wonderful.  The  figure  is  drawn  to  perfection. 
How  it  hangs  from  its  dragged-down  arms,  not 
distorted,  but  graceful  even  in  its  rigidity!  How 
luminous  in  the  unearthly  light  it  shines!  How 
splendid  the  white  flesh  against  the  dark  sky! 
Every  bit  of  it  is  painted  by  Rubens's  own  hand 
and  is  in  a  fairly  good  state  of  preservation,  though 
too  much  cleaned  and  possibly  darkened  in  the 


>8  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

shadows.  But  it  is  not  repainted.  It  is  really  a 
wonderful  picture — a  satisfactory  Rubens,  though 
making  no  display  of  colour.  A  master  mind  and 
hand  worked  together  here  on  a  theme  hallowed 
by  the  ages,  but  seen  by  Rubens  in  a  new  way 
and  treated  in  a  new  manner.  Look  at  the  same 
subject  by  Van  Dyck  (No.  825)  and  see  how  the 
pupil  suffers  by  comparison! 

749.    The  Trinity.     A  decorative  conception  of  the 

power  and  majesty  of  the  Godhead,  designed,  no 
doubt,  by  Rubens,  but  executed  in  the  workshop 
by  pupils  or  assistants.  In  addition,  it  has  been 
restored.  The  angels,  the  globe,  and  the  clouds, 
with  the  figures  and  then*  robes,  all  show  the  white- 
wash grey  trail  of  the  restorer — that  very  neces- 
sary but  often  ruin-breeding  person. 

751.   Jacob  and  Esau.     Another  school  piece,  with 

the  poor  sheep  possibly  by  Wildens  and  the  camels 
by  some  other  equally  bad  painter.     The  surface 
has  been  repainted  and  the  colour  is  now  hectic. 

752.    Me/eager   and  Atalanta.     A  graceful  if  care- 
less work  now  somewhat  the  worse  for  wear  and 
restoration.     The  cupid's  face  and  wings  and  At- 
alanta's  left  hand  probably  became  dislocated  in 
the  cleaning  room.     The  landscape  is  said  to  be 
by  Wildens  and  the  animals  by  De  Vos.     Why  not 
give  the  figures  to  the  school  and  have  done  with  it? 

753.    The  Romans  and  the  Sabines.     A  school  piece 

upon  which  Rubens  may  have  added  some  surface 
touches  not  now  apparent.     It  has  been  repainted. 
See  also  the  War  and  Peace,  No.  755. 

754.    The  Drunken  Silenus.     It  is  coarse  and  brutal 

*      as  comports  with  the  theme.    The  figures  were 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  69 

done  by  Rubens's  own  hand.  The  accessories  are 
supposed  to  have  been  done  by  Snyders.  Painted 
on  wood  and  hurt  in  spots  (notably  across  from  the 
knees  of  Silenus),  yet  it  still  has  much  of  Rubens 
about  it.  If  the  figures  offend,  look  at  the  grapes. 
They  are  quite  perfect.  Go  close  to  the  picture 
and  see  the  largeness  and  sureness  of  the  brush- 
work  in  the  heads.  A  later  version  at  Berlin  (No. 
776B),  and  a  similar  subject  treated  with  more 
brilliancy  and  now  in  a  better  condition  in  the  Nar 
tional  Gallery,  London  (No.  853). 

Massacre  of  the  Innocents.     Restoration  has 

about  done  for  it.  Look  at  the  wrecked  angels  in 
the  sky  and  let  the  rest  go.  Thulden  is  blamed  for 
the  background,  but  the  restorer  has  gone  over 
it  since  Thulden  went  to  the  shades.  Said  to  be 
in  Rubens's  "late  manner,"  which  usually  means 
almost  any  messy  handling  by  his  pupils.  It  is  a 
questionable  picture. 

The  Entombment.  A  sketch  by  a  master- 
hand,  and  probably  that  of  Rubens,  though  at 
first  blush  the  work  looks  like  that  of  Van  Dyck. 

-Pastoral    with     Two    Figures.     The    shadows 


seem  to  have  been  underbased  in  something  like 
bitumen,  which  has  sweated  out  and  cracked  the 
picture.  The  flesh-notes  are  not  in  good  condi- 
tion owing  to  much  cleaning  and  restoration.  No 
doubt  originally  a  picture  of  verve  and  fine  colour 
effect.  The  shepherdess  is  supposed  to  be  Helene 
Fourment,  the  shepherd  Rubens  himself. 

Landscape  and  Cattle.     Less  pretentious  than 

No.  761,  but  better  drawn  and  lighted.  Even  so, 
it  is  difficult  to  see  Rubens  in  the  cold  colour  or 


70  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

the  hard  cattle.  The  figures  are  not  bad,  but  they 
are  not  Rubens's  figures. 

761.    Landscape   with   Rainbow.     A   small   version, 

perhaps  the  original,  of  the  Rainbow  Landscape  in 
the  Wallace  Collection  (No.  63).     It  is  a  little  rigid, 
but  nevertheless  rather  good  landscape  work  for 
the  time.     There  is  reason  to  doubt  that  Rubens 
did  either  the  small  or  the  large  picture.     The 
general  effect  is  good,  but  the  drawing  of  details 
leaves  much  to  be  desired.     The  light  on  the  foli- 
age is  crude,  the  figures  and  cattle  poor,  the  sky 
scattered  and  weak.     See  the  note  on  the  Wallace 
Collection  picture  and  its  companion  in  the  Na- 
tional Gallery,  London. 

762.    St.  Christopher.     A  finely  drawn  figure  of  the 

saint.     It  has  the  strength  of  a  swiftly  done  sketch. 
Possibly  a  sketch  for  the  shutters  of  the  Descent 
in  the  Antwerp  Cathedral. 

764- )  The  Medicis  Cycle.     These  are  the  sketches 

779  I  for  the  Marie  de  Medicis  pictures  in  the  Louvre 
(see  the  Louvre  notes),  and  are  good  things  to 
study  for  Rubens's  sketch  drawing  and  handling. 
They  are  thinly  painted — in  fact,  no  more  than 
rubbed  in.  They  contain  few  final  touches  and 
must  not  be  confused  with  his  finished  manner. 
Besides,  the  colour  is  much  subdued  here — his 
sketch  work  never  being  so  high-keyed  as  his  fin- 
ished pictures. 

780.    The    Obsequies    of    Decius    Mus.     A    sketch 

rather  more  elaborated  than  usual,  in  which  one 
can  study  the  Rubens  brush  to  advantage.  What 
clear,  clean  colour!  The  picture  done  from  this 
sketch  is  in  the  Lichtenstein  Gallery,  Vienna — one 
of  a  series  of  six. 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  71 

782.    Rubens  and  His  First  Wife,  Isabella  Brandt. 

*  This  is  an  early  portrait,  done  about  1609,  and 
among  the  master's  first  portraits.  It  is  a  frank 
statement  about  himself  and  wife,  probably  done 
in  the  honeymoon  season,  and  consequently  a  little 
gauche.  The  picture  is  hard  in  line  and  precise, 
even  dry  in  handling,  but  very  accurate,  and  not 
badly  held  together.  Notice  how  well  he  fills  the 
canvas  with  the  oval  of  the  figures,  broken  by  a 
swinging  cross-line  in  the  shape  of  an  S,  made  by 
the  arms  and  hands.  The  colour  and  light  are 
both  a  little  sombre,  with  the  flesh-notes  kept  high 
from  the  very  start.  The  textures  in  the  jacket, 
the  plum-coloured  dress,  the  sleeve  of  the  painter's 
coat  are  all  well  given.  What  excellent  portraits 
they  are!  What  a  fair  and  rather  foolish  face  under 
the  lady's  hat,  with  its  delicately  cast  shadow! 

786.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     Said  to  be  a  copy  after 

Juste  van  Cleve  the  Younger  in  the  Berlin  Gallery. 
It  has  a  weaker  look  than  the  average  portrait 
head  by  Rubens.  A  pupil  might  think  it  worth 
while  to  copy  Juste  van  Cleve,  but  why  should 
Rubens  copy  work  inferior  to  his  own?  See  also 
Nos.  783  and  787 — the  latter  done  with  consider- 
able sureness. 

788.    Elizabeth   of  Bourbon.     It   is   probably   the 

work  of  a  pupil  or  copyist,  and  belongs  in  the  same 
class  with  Nos.  787  and  790.  In  either  or  any  event 
it  is  inferior  work.  A  similar  head  and  bust  are 
in  the  Vienna  Gallery  (No.  873). 

790.   Don  Ferdinand  of  Spain.     It  is  badly  drawn 

and  poorly  painted.  The  eyes  do  not  match,  the 
ruff  is  not  drawn,  the  dress  is  loosely  guessed  at. 
There  is  no  reason  to  believe  that  Rubens  did  it. 


72  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

794.    Helene  Fourment.     If  the  student  by  this  time 

has  become  acquainted  with  Rubens's  flesh-notes 
(see  No.  729  or  the  portraits  Nos.  799-800  for  them) 
he  will  not  credit  the  apoplectic  face  and  hands  in 
this  picture  to  the  master's  brush.     It  is  the  brush 
of  the  restorer  again  that  has  here  worked  with 
results  that  are  almost  fatal.     See  the  restorer's 
work  in  the  curtain  with  its  whitewash  high  lights 
or  in  the  dress  or  the  architecture.     Perhaps  orig- 
inally a  picture  by  Rubens's  own  hand.     It  still 
has  much  charm  of  presence.     The  left  eye  is  odd 
in  drawing. 

795.   Helene  Fourment.     This  portrait  is  painted 

on  wood  and  is  still  free  in  parts  from  any  retouch- 
ing.    The  mouth,  neck,   breast,  left  hand  are  a 
little  hurt,  and  all  of  it  is  over-cleaned,  but  it  is  in 
much  better  condition  than,  say,  No.  796.     It  is 
not  a  very  pleasing  portrait  of  Rubens's  wife — not 
an  idyllic  affair  as  compared  with  other  portraits 
of  her  elsewhere.     She  looks  blousy  and  a  little 
dull.     Nor  is  the  colour  scheme  of  any  great  charm. 
That  Rubens  did  it  is  questionable. 

796.    Helene  Fourment  with  a  Black  Cap.     It  has 

suffered  from  repainting,  but  was  probably  never 
more  than  a  poor  copy  of  the  upper  part  of  the 
Rothschild  full-length,  in  Paris.  The  face  is  out- 
lined with  brown  edges,  as  also  the  nose,  brows, 
and  eyes.  The  flesh  is  not  that  of  Rubens.  The 
beadwork  in  the  sleeve,  the  chain,  the  necklace 
have  been  wrecked  in  their  modelling,  and  the  neck 
and  hair  hurt  by  repainting. 

797.    Helene  Fourment  and  Her  Son.     A  romantic 

**     affair,  done  by  the  painter  for  the  love  of  the  sitters 

and  the  love  of  art.     It  is  beautifully  composed, 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  73 

the  figures  filling  the  space  quite  charmingly,  and 
the  column,  curtain,  and  landscape  suggesting 
luxurious  surroundings  befitting  the  figures.  The 
colour  is  cooler  than  in  a  similar  picture  in  the 
Louvre  but  very  satisfactory.  The  handling  has 
nothing  laboured  or  perfunctory  about  it.  In 
fact,  it  is  a  rapid,  sketchy  picture,  as  one  may  see 
by  the  manner  in  which  the  dress,  bench,  sky,  and 
curtain  are  done.  A  little  injured  by  repainting 
in  the  child's  hands  and  feet  and  the  mother's 
breast  and  face.  The  white  stuff  across  the  lap 
has  lost  its  quality,  and  the  purple  skirt  under  it 
has  been  greyed;  but  beauty  is  still  in  the  fine 
figure,  and  a  nice,  domestic,  even  idyllic  sentiment 
in  the  group. 

798.    Rubens  and  Helene  Fourment  in  the  Garden. 

The  figures  are  evidently  made  to  represent  the 
Rubens  family,  but  Rubens  never  made  any  such 
representation  as  this.  He  could  not.  The  figures 
are  short,  squat,  awkward,  and  have  neither  the 
power  to  stand  well  nor  walk  well.  Look  closely 
at  the  boy's  left  leg,  the  manikin  with  the  bad 
eyes  and  hands  posing  as  Rubens,  the  heavy,  sack- 
like  Helene,  and  the  wooden  old  woman.  And  the 
formal  trees,  the  eut-and-dried  flowers,  the  dread- 
ful dog,  turkey,  and  pea-fowls,  the  chateau,  and 
the  garden  back  of  it!  It  is  not  repainting  that 
we  have  here  to  quarrel  with,  but  poor  painting 
in  the  first  place.  It  is  a  cheap  affair — not  even 
a  good  school  piece. 

799.   Portrait  of  Jan  Brandt.    This  is  a  portrait  of 

*      Rubens's  father-in-law — a  hot-faced  portrait  but  a 

strong  one.  Notice  the  fine  modelling  of  the  head 
and  its  setting  in  the  ruff.  What  truthful,  con- 


74  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

vincing  work  in  the  hair  and  beard,  and  the  fore- 
shortening of  the  jaw  from  chin  to  ear!  The  figure 
rests  well  in  the  chair,  and  the  room  is  suggested 
by  the  grey  wall  and  the  books. 

800.  — — Portrait  of  Dr.  Van  Thulden.  An  official  por- 
trait of  a  professor,  done  in  academic  robes,  but 
not  in  an  official  way.  The  background  is  hurt, 
so  that  the  head  and  figure  do  not  now  fit  into  it. 
The  face,  considered  by  itself,  is  excellent,  and  so, 
too,  the  figure.  It  is  a  strong  personality  with 
well-modelled  head  and  beautifully  painted  hair. 

545.  Ruisdael,  Jacob  van.  Landscape.  This  is  evi- 
dently a  study  from  nature,  modified  in  measure 
by  an  artificially  focussed  light.  It  is  better  than 
his  larger  work,  but  is  by  no  means  clever  in  ob- 
servation or  firm  in  drawing.  See  also  No.  546. 

544.    Landscape.     The  path  and  dunes  at  the  left 

are  well  given.  The  sky  is  too  cold  for  the  fore- 
ground, the  trees  rather  large  in  volume  for  Ruis- 
dael, the  handling  freer  and  better  than  usual  with 
him.  The  total  result  is  somewhat  forced  but 
strong.  A  very  good  Ruisdael. 

551.  Landscape.  This  is  up  to  the  average  Ruis- 
dael, though  somewhat  composed  to  order  and  re- 
cited by  rote.  In  the  same  vein  as  No.  548. 

547.    Northern  Landscape.     It  has  very  little  body 

or  substance  to  it,  but  manages  to  make  an  im- 
pression by  what  is  called  its  "  tone."  Most  of  the 
"tone"  was  seen  (if  seen  at  all)  in  a  dark  mirror. 
Many  of  Ruisdael's  landscapes  suggest  its  use.  It 
is  good  decoration,  if  not  the  most  truthful  tran- 
script of  nature. 


SCHAFFNER,  MARTIN  75 

Ruysdael,  Salomon   van.     Dutch    Water-View. 

The  resemblance  to  Van  Goyen  (upon  whose  art 
Salomon  van  Ruysdael  formed  himself)  is  very  ap- 
parent here  in  the  diagonal  composition,  in  the 
trees,  and  in  the  manner  of  dabbing  on  the  foliage 
instead  of  drawing  it.  The  greens  are  brighter 
than  Van  Goyen  painted  and  there  is  evident  in- 
terest in  the  painting  of  tree  reflections  in  the 
water,  but  it  is  uncertainly  done — the  tree  trunks 
being  poorly  drawn  and  wriggling  too  much.  A 
good  sky,  somewhat  rubbed  by  cleaning. 

Landscape  with  Watch-Tower.     The  tower  and 

the  wagons,  with  figures  grouped  at  the  bottom, 
are  better  than  the  trees  and  the  sky.  It  is  a 
poor  affair,  keeping  rightful  company  with  No. 
540  in  this  respect. 

Sarto,  Andrea  del.  Holy  Family  with  St.  John, 
St.  Elizabeth,  and  Angels.  The  group  fills  the  panel 
with  an  oval  composition  of  which  the  Child  is 
the  centre.  It  is  a  pretty  Child  and  a  girlish  Ma- 
donna, with  little  strength  in  either.  The  colour 
is  variegated  but  somewhat  frail  as  is  also  the  light- 
and-shade.  There  are  a  number  of  versions  of  this 
picture  in  European  galleries,  and  this  is  hardly 
the  original.  It  is  much  injured  by  repainting. 

Schaffner,  Martin.  High  Altar  of  We  t  ten- 
hausen.  There  are  four  large  and  rather  im- 
portant panels  of  this  altar-piece  hung  on  a  screen. 
One  cannot  get  far  enough  away  from  them  to 
see  them  properly,  and  of  course  they  suffer  much 
by  being  out  of  place  in  a  museum;  but,  even  so, 
they  show  with  fine  effect.  The  Annunciation 
at  left  is  charming  in  the  Madonna  and  angel,  in 
the  angel  at  the  bed,  in  the  interior,  the  light,  the 


76  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

draperies,  the  architecture.  The  Presentation  has 
a  fine  group  of  figures  and  a  glimpse  of  distant 
landscape.  The  Death  of  the  Madonna  (No.  217), 
with  the  group  of  the  apostles,  is  perhaps  less  in- 
teresting but  is  very  good.  At  the  upper  right 
is  the  small  figure  of  the  Madonna  ascending  with 
angels  and  being  received  by  the  Father.  At  the 
back,  John  kneeling  with  his  head  in  his  hands 
upon  the  bed  is  pathetic. 

218.    — —Portrait    of    Count     Wolfgang    van     Getting. 

With  a  landscape  at  either  side  sketched  out  with 
gold  lines  upon  dark  blue-green.  A  fine  portrait, 
hurt  somewhat  by  too  much  cleaning  but  still  of 
commanding  dignity.  No.  1557  is  done  in  the 
same  vein. 

174.  Schongauer,  Martin.  Nativity.  Said  to  be  a 
workshop  picture,  but  it  has  charming  colour  and 
holds  together  as  though  done  by  a  trained  and 
skilful  hand. 

1561.    Signorelli,    Luca.    Madonna    and    Child.     The 

landscape  seems  cheaply  done  and  the  colour  is  by 
no  means  distinguished,  but  there  is  good  draw- 
ing of  the  red  drapery  and  a  fine  nude  figure  at 
the  back.  It  is  not  very  attractive  in  method, 
and  was  probably  done  in  the  shop  by  the  same 
assistants  who  did  No.  74  in  the  Uffizi  at  Florence. 

955.  Snyders,  Frans.  Still-Life.  Realistic  enough  in 
drawing  and  colour,  but  a  dry  piece  of  handling, 
done  apparently  without  deftness  or  any  love  for 
agreeable  surfaces. 

1073.  Sodoma,  II  (Giovanni  Antonio  Bazzi).  The 
Holy  Family.  An  early  work  and  yet  with  some- 
thing Raphaelesque  about  it — for  lack  of  a  better 


STEEN,  JAN  77 

word.  The  types  are  slight  and  inclined  to  be 
pretty.  The  colours  bright,  the  surface  smooth, 
the  drawing  acceptable,  and  the  sentiment  satisfac- 
tory though  leaning  toward  sentimentality.  With 
a  good  landscape.  It  is  not  universally  accepted 
as  a  Sodoma. 

987  \  Spinello  Aretino.  Ten  Saints.  Two  panels 
with  five  saints  in  each  panel — the  whole  piece 
very  decorative  in  gold  grounds  and  haloes,  long 
robes  and  patterned  brocades.  The  predella  be- 
low (by  another  hand)  is  small  and  practically 
intact,  while  the  larger  panels  have  been  injured 
by  repainting.  Compare  the  colours  (red  with 
red,  blue  with  blue,  white  with  white,  flesh  with 
flesh)  in  the  predella  and  the  panels  above  to  see 
how  the  larger  has  suffered  by  repainting.  The 
colours  have  not  now  the  same  quality  in  the  pan- 
els as  in  the  predella.  Probably  when  originally 
painted  the  colours  were  from  the  same  or  a  similar 
palette.  The  predella  is  ascribed  to  the  Upper 
Italian  School  and  the  panels  to  Spinello,  but  both 
attributions  are  doubtful. 

392.    Steen,  Jan.     The  Love-Sick  One.     This  picture 

*  is  beautifully  painted  as  regards  its  textures  and 
surfaces.     It  is  good  also  in  the  setting  of  the  in- 
terior and  in  the  colour.     The  face  of  the  lady  is 
a  little  rubbed  by  cleaning,  so  that  the  jaw  line 
and   the   profile   are   now   too   hard.     The   light 
through  the  door  at  the  left  and  at  the  window  is 
kept  down  so  as  not  to  detract  from  the  central 
figure. 

391.    Card-Players  Quarrelling.     A.  good  picture  of 

*  a  not  too  pleasing  subject.     The  interior  is  well 
drawn.     There  is  light,  air,  depth  to  it,  and  the 


'8  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

figures  are  well  set  in  it.  Perhaps  there  is  too 
much  still-life — a  predominance  of  small  objects — 
but  how  well  it  is  done!  Steen  did  many  poorer 
pictures  than  this. 

188.  Strigel,    Bernhard.     Portrait    of    Conrad   Reh- 
linger.     A  kind  of  portraiture  that  Holbein,  a  few 
years  later,  made  famous.     The  shadow  of  the  fig- 
ure thrown  on  the  screen  at  the  back  now  hurts 
the  otherwise  fine  appearance.     It  has  blackened 
by  time  or  repainting.     A  simple  composition  with 
upright  lines  and  much  dignity  therewith. 

189.    Children    of    Conrad    Rehlinger.     This    is    a 

companion  piece  to  No.  188.     Unfortunately,  it  is 
somewhat  injured,  but  is  still  interesting  in  the 
white  faces  of  the  children,  their  plain  dresses,  and 
their  quiet  attitudes.     A  glimpse  of  the  sea  in  both 
panels. 

190.    Portrait  of  Hatter.     An  honest  piece  of  work, 

perhaps  too  smooth  and  elaborate  in  its  doing,  but 
not  at  all  bad.     It  has  been  retouched. 

390.  Sweerts,  Michiel.  A  Drinking  Shop.  An  excel- 
**  lent  picture  done  with  fine  characterisation  and 
easy  painting.  How  naturally  the  figures  sit  or 
stand,  how  simply  they  are  drawn,  and  in  what 
a  comprehensive  manner  they  are  painted !  Notice 
how  broad  and  flat  the  painting  of  the  costume  of 
the  man  in  the  centre,  also  the  bench,  the  hat,  the 
drinking  mug  of  the  man  at  the  right.  The  chairs 
and  wall  and  floor  are  all  seen  and  painted  in  the 
same  large  way.  This  is  the  very  best  kind  of 
painting — the  kind  of  Terborch  and,  in  a  large 
sense,  of  Velasquez.  The  colour  looks  sombre,  but 
it  is  a  very  subtle  harmony  of  low  notes  that  be- 
comes more  engaging  on  acquaintance.  Formerly 


TERBORCH,  GERARD  79 

ascribed  to  Terborch.  Probably  many  pictures  by 
Sweerts  are  still  under  Terborch's  name  in  the 
galleries.  There  are  very  few  under  his  own  name, 
and  this  one  at  Munich  is  the  best  of  them. 
916.  Teniers  the  Younger,  David.  A  Guard-Room. 
Large  and  pretentious  but  a  bit  superficial  for 
Teniers.  The  armour  and  drums  at  left  are  too 
high  in  key  for  the  rest  of  the  picture.  It  is  dis- 
tinctly thin  in  workmanship  all  through.  There 
are  nearly  thirty  Teniers  in  this  gallery,  from  which 
one  may  select,  say,  No.  918  for  its  unusual  colour, 
No.  912  for  its  atmosphere,  and  No.  903  for  clean, 
swift  painting.  This  Guard-Room  picture  was  one 
that  Teniers  repeated  a  number  of  times. 

389.    Terborch,   Gerard.     Boy  and  Dog.     It   is  not 

only  a  good  picture  technically  but  an  interesting 
and  truthful  study  of  life.  The  intentness  of  the 
boy,  the  apprehensiveness  of  the  dog  are  capital. 
And  what  drawing  and  handling  withal!  What  a 
piece  of  painting  in  the  hair!  The  hat  is  a  master- 
piece by  itself.  What  drawing  in  the  hands,  the 
chair,  the  wooden  block  at  the  left!  The  colour, 
too,  is  excellent,  and  the  angles  and  atmosphere  of 
the  room  are  well  given.  A  fine  little  picture. 

1586.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     A  masterpiece  in  little. 

**      How  could  one  give  the  truth  of  character  in  this 

dignified  Dutchman  better  than  here?  What  a 
gentleman  he  is!  How  well  he  stands  and  how 

r'et  and  restful  about  it  he  is!     What  drawing  in 
hat,   cloak,   figure!    The  blacks  against  the 
grey,  accented  by  the  white,  make  up  the  scheme 
of  colour. 

1587.    Portrait   of  a    Woman.     It   could    hardly   be 

**      added  to  or  taken  away  from  without  hurting  it. 


80  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

It  is  just  right  as  it  is.  The  body  has  weight  and 
substance  under  the  ample  folds  of  the  dress,  and 
the  whole  figure  holds  its  place  charmingly  in  its 
grey  envelope.  There  are  dignity,  candour,  and 
simplicity  about  it,  which  are  necessities  of  the 
best  portraiture.  How  well  the  lady  stands! 
And  what  a  lady  she  is!  This  and  its  companion 
piece  (No.  1586)  are  almost  devoid  of  colour,  yet 
how  fine  they  are  in  their  sobriety  of  hue!  The 
colour,  such  as  it  is,  has  distinction  and  refinement. 

388.  — — The  Ambassador  of  Love.  More  pretentious 
than  the  other  pictures  put  down  to  Terborch  in 
this  gallery  and  not  so  good.  The  white  satin 
gown  is  a  little  frail  and  flickering  and  suggests 
the  work  of  some  follower.  The  picture  is  hurt 
in  the  background  by  cleaning  and  repainting. 
The  colour  of  the  woman's  dress  is  repeated  in  the 
dog. 

1271.    Tiepolo,  Giovanni  Battista.    Adoration  of  Kings. 

A  large  and  rather  heavily  handled  Tiepolo.  It 
has  not  the  lightness  of  touch  nor  the  imagination 
nor  the  colour  quality  that  we  usually  expect  from 
this  painter.  No  doubt  it  suffers  from  its  present 
surroundings — all  Tiepolo  pictures  look  badly  in 
galleries,  because  of  their  light  colour  schemes — but, 
in  any  event,  the  picture  seems  to  lack  inspiration. 
It  has  the  look  of  something  done  in  the  studio 
by  pupils  or  assistants. 

1127.  Tintoretto,  Jacopo  (Robusti).  Portrait  of  an 
*  Architect.  A  very  good  portrait,  rather  fine  in 
character,  full  of  spirit  and  life,  and  well  placed 
on  the  canvas.  Notice  how  the  figure  is  fitted  in 
around  the  open  window.  Only  the  landscape 
suggests  Tintoretto — the  man  was  done  by  some 


TITIAN  (TIZIANO  VECELLIO)  81 

one  near  the  Bassani.     But  no  matter  about  who 
did  it,  the  work  itself  is  excellent. 

1574.    Christ    in    the   House   of  Mary   and  Martha. 

*  It  has  the  advantage  of  the  other  and  larger  Tin- 
torettos  hanging  in  the  same  room  in  that  it  is 
really  by  Tintoretto.     The  three  figures  are  ar- 
ranged in  a  circle  and  the  action  is  to  the  right. 
The  two  women  are  graceful  in  form  and  agreeable 
in  colour.     The  setting  of  the  room,  the  cupboard 
with  still-life  at  right,   the  doorway  out  are  all 
well  given.     A  really  fine  picture.     Brought  here 
from  the  gallery  at  Augsburg. 

1128.  Tintoretto,  School  of.  Venetian  Nobleman  and 
Sons.  The  man  at  the  right  has  the  face  of  one 
long  dead,  and  the  other  figures  are  petrified.  The 
picture  is  much  damaged.  The  landscape  has 
been  scumbled  and  whitewashed.  It  is  not  likely 
that  Tintoretto  ever  saw  the  picture,  though  pos- 
sibly Jacopo  Bassano  may  have  had  something  to 
do  with  it,  as  Mr.  Berenson  suggests. 

1112.    Titian  (Tiziano  Vecellio).    Portrait  of  Charles  V. 

*  It  is  not  possible  that  Titian,  the  prince  of  all 
portrait-painters,  left  that  wild  sky  and  column,  or 
that  dreadful  red  floor  with  the  black  feet  upon 
it,   or  that  lead-coloured  face   and  bad  brocade 
back  of  it,  in  their  present  condition.     The  sur- 
face of  the  picture  has  been  completely  repainted. 
It  is  even  assumed  that  Rubens  repainted  it,  but 
Rubens  was  just  as  wonderful  a  painter  in  his 
way  as  Titian,  and  could  not  have  left  any  such 
crude  surface  as  this.     The  repainter  was  a  medi- 
ocre person  in  the  cleaning  room,  of  name  unknown. 
The  design  and  the  drawing  are  still  sufficiently  ap- 
parent in  the  portrait  to  show  how  simply  Titian 


82  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

could  see  and  paint  an  emperor.  It  is  still  a  fine 

composition,    the   figure   restful  in   pose,   serene, 

self-poised  as  befits  a  sovereign.  But  the  surface 
of  Titian  has  vanished. 

1110.   Vanitas.     The  grace  of  the  design,  the  fine 

*  type,  some  of  the  charm  of  the  figure,  and  some  of 
the  surface  are  still  here;    but   there  has   been 
over-cleaning  in  the  face,  bust,  and  hand,  and  some 
repainting.     It  is,   nevertheless,   a  beautiful  pic- 
ture— one  of  the  early  types  of  beauty  belonging 
to  the  Laura  Dianti  series  that  Titian  painted  for 
the  cabinets  of  noble  patrons.     The  still-life  in 
the  mirror  seems  odd  for  Titian.     The  picture  has 
been  variously  attributed  by  different  writers.     It 
was  for  a  long  time  thought  to  be  by  Giorgione. 

1111.   Portrait  of  a  Man.     A  very  commanding  por- 

**      trait  in  Titian's  best  manner  and  comparable  to 

the  Duke  of  Norfolk  portrait  in  the  Pitti  or  the 
Man  in  Black  in  the  Louvre.  What  an  epitome 
of  manliness,  dignity,  and  repose!  It  is  useless  to 
indicate  pin-points  of  error  in  such  a  superb  por- 
trait. The  only  thing  to  do  is  to  admire  it.  It  is 
worthy  of  unstinted  admiration,  and  is  almost  a 
perfect  portrait.  Titian  never  did  anything  better. 
It  was  considered  a  portrait  of  Aretino  at  one  time, 
but  that  idea  has  been  abandoned.  In  good  con- 
dition. 

1113.    Madonna  and  Child.     A  majestic  conception 

*  of  the  Madonna  and  Child.     It  is  not  religious  or 
pietistic  in  an  early  Italian  way.     The  Madonna 
is   of   the   patrician  type,   material  perhaps,  but 
beautiful  none  the  less.     The  lines  of  the  Child  are 
graceful,  and  the  robes  of  the  Madonna  are  done 
in  a  broad,  free  way.    There  is  large  drawing,  too, 


TRAUT,  HANS  83 

in  the  Child's  figure.  Both  the  figures  and  robes 
are  rich  in  colour,  and  the  landscape  is  warmed  by 
a  sunset  sky.  It  is  somewhat  hurt — the  Child's 
hand  is  destroyed,  and  the  ear  has  been  repaired, 
and  there  is  old  repainting  elsewhere — but  on  the 
whole  it  is  in  fair  condition. 

The  Crowning  with   Thorns.     A  late  picture, 

done  when  Titian  was  a  very  old  man.  The  han- 
dling is  heavy,  much  thumbed  and  kneaded,  inco- 
herent in  parts.  It  is  a  repetition  of  the  Louvre 
picture  (No.  1583),  with  a  different  illumination 
and  much  looser  drawing.  It  seems  less  physical 
in  types  and  more  elevated  in  feeling  than  the 
Louvre  picture,  but  it  lacks  in  sureness  as  regards 
both  form  and  colour. 

Portrait  of  a  Venetian  Noble.     Unfortunately, 

this  portrait  has  been  much  repainted,  but  it  still 
possesses  nobility,  with  great  dignity  and  repose. 
The  attribution  has  been  questioned.  It  was  as- 
signed by  Crowe  and  Cavalcaselle  to  Tintoretto, 
but  the  workmanship  hardly  carries  out  such  an 
assignment.  Nor  is  Titian  positively  proclaimed 
in  it.  In  any  event,  a  very  good  portrait. 

Madonna,  Child,  St.  John,  and  Donor.     The 

Madonna  is  badly  drawn  in  the  figure  and  a  little 
theatrical  in  pose,  while  the  Child  is  almost  im- 
possible in  attitude;  but  St.  John  is  well  indicated, 
the  donor  is  respectable,  and  the  landscape  is  fairly 
good.  Titian  never  did  it.  It  is  by  some  follower 
of  his. 

Traut,  Hans.  Madonna  with  Angels.  These 
primitives  of  Germany  should  be  looked  at  in  the 
same  way  that  we  now  look  at  the  Vivarini  of  Venice 


84  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

or  Gentile  da  Fabriano  in  Umbria.  They  are  by 
no  means  perfect  technically,  but  how  sincere  they 
are,  and  what  fine  decorative  instinct  they  have! 
As  an  arrangement  of  colour  upon  gold,  this  picture 
is  excellent.  Look  at  the  pattern  of  the  angel's 
wings  or  that  of  the  Madonna's  brocade! 

1293.  Velasquez,  Diego  de  Silva  y.  Portrait  of  a 
Young  Man.  In  the  early  style  of  Velasquez  and 
never  quite  finished,  as  may  be  seen  by  the  lines 
in  the  collar  and  the  sketched  hand.  A  portrait  of 
vigour  and  force,  the  face  and  head  well  modelled, 
the  eyes  deep  sunk,  the  nose  sharp,  the  mouth  ex- 
cellent. There  is  no  reason  to  doubt  its  being  by 
Velasquez. 

1292.  Portrait  of  the  Painter.  The  attribution  of 

the  picture  as  well  as  the  identification  of  the 
sitter  may  be  questioned.  This  is  only  super- 
ficially in  the  style  of  Velasquez,  only  superficially  a 
likeness  of  the  painter.  His  portrait  in  the  Sur- 
render of  Breda  or  Las  Meninas  in  Madrid  does 
not  entirely  correspond.  A  very  good  portrait, 
though  somewhat  repainted.  Compare  it  with  the 
early  Velasquez,  No.  1293,  in  this  gallery.  It 
shows  a  different  handling. 

1133.  Veronese,  Paolo  Caliari.  Jupiter  and  Antiope. 
A  fragment  cut  from  a  larger  picture.  It  has  been 
much  cleaned  and  conveys  in  its  present  state 
very  little  idea  of  Paolo  Veronese.  Formerly  given 
to  Titian,  and,  by  Morelli,  to  a  follower  of  Titian's. 

1145.  Adoration  of  Kings.  It  is  a  fairly  good  pic- 
ture, but  is  probably  a  school  work,  as  the  catalogue 
States.  How  Paolo  himself  treated  this  theme  is 
best  seen,  perhaps,  in  the  Dresden  Gallery  (No. 
225). 


WERTINGER,  HANS  85 

1. 146.  Portrait  Croup.  It  is  not  probable  that  Paolo 

ever  did  it,  though  its  present  condition  is  too  bad 
to  say  anything  about  it  except  that  it  is  ruined. 
Formerly  known  as  a  Titian  and  also  as  a  Tintoretto. 

1. 135.  Portrait  of  a  Lady.  Somewhat  too  brown  in 

tone  to  be  pleasant,  but  a  substantial  personality 
is  shown.  It  was  never  too  well  done,  as  the  cur- 
tain shows  us.  The  suggestion  of  Zelotti  in  the 
catalogue  note  indicates  its  probable  origin. 

L137.  Holy  Family.  The  head  of  the  Joseph  is  fairly 

well  done,  but  the  rest  of  the  picture  speaks  for 
Carlo  Caliari,  or  a  copyist,  or  a  restorer,  or  almost 
any  one  save  Paolo.  The  placing  of  all  these  medi- 
ocre works  of  the  school  to  the  master's  account 
merely  confuses  history  and  makes  connoisseurship 
appear  more  untrustworthy  than  it  is  in  reality. 

812.  Vos,  Cornells  de.  The  Hutten  Family.  It  is 
pallid  in  the  flesh-notes  and  cold  in  the  landscape, 
but  interesting  as  regards  the  children.  The  lady 
is  too  china-like.  Not  the  best  example  of  De 
Vos.  Formerly  given  to  Frans  Hals. 

251.  Weiditz,  Hans.  Holy  Family.  At  various  times 
ascribed  to  Gossart,  Baldung,  Diirer — a  picture 
which  is  still  seeking  the  author  of  its  being  under 
various  names.  It  shows  some  of  the  influence  of 
Diirer,  but  is  not  remarkable  in  any  way. 

223 1  Wertinger,   Hans.     Portraits  of  the  Duke  and 

224  /  Duchess  of  Bavaria.  Two  portraits  with  rich  dec- 
orative effect,  produced  largely  by  the  use  of  gold  in 
the  costumes,  the  jewellery,  and  the  arabesque  at 
the  top.  Despite  this  and  their  elaborate  landscape 
backgrounds,  the  heads  have  force  and  realistic 
truth  about  them,  and  hold  their  own  in  the  picture 
very  well.  Formerly  attributed  to  Burgkmair. 


86  THE  OLD  PINACOTHEK 

347.    Wet  the  Elder,  Jacob  de.     Abraham  and  Hagar. 

A  diagonal  composition,  good  in  light,  air,  and  col- 
our. It  has  a  nice  tone  about  it.  By  a  pupil  of 
Rembrandt — or  at  least  a  follower.  Of  course,  it 
was  once  assigned  to  Rembrandt. 

100.  Weyden,  Roger  van  der.  St.  Luke  Drawing  the 
Virgin.  A  large  but  not  very  good  picture.  The 
landscape  is  crude  and  pallid,  the  waves  formal, 
the  drawing  of  the  figures  timid.  The  picture  looks 
like  a  copy.  It  has  been  retouched  in  the  bargain. 
A  better  version  is  in  the  Hermitage  (No.  445). 
Perhaps  neither  of  them  is  by  Roger. 

101-  1  Altar-Piece  of  the  Three  Kings.     A  triptych 

103  J  with  an  Adoration  in  the  centre  and  a  Presentation 
**  and  an  Annunciation  in  the  wings.  This  is  the 
only  good  picture  ascribed  to  Roger  here  at  Munich. 
Excellent  types  and  good  grouping,  with  splendid 
costumes  and  jewel  work,  are  to  be  seen  in  the 
central  panel.  Notice  the  brocade  of  the  king  at 
the  right  or  the  presents  held  in  the  hands.  The 
drawing  is  sharp  and  the  colour  not  so  fine  in  qual- 
ity as  usual  with  Roger.  The  landscape  and  back- 
ground are  airless,  but  the  buildings  are  interesting 
as  architecture.  The  Presentation  shows  fine  archi- 
tecture, good  heads  and  robes;  and  in  the  An- 
nunciation, what  a  glow  of  red  tempered  by  blue 
and  white!  A  good  triptych,  but  it  is,  perhaps, 
just  a  trifle  frail  for  Roger's  own  hand.  In  style 
it  is  not  unlike  the  Bladelin  altar-piece  in  Berlin 
(No.  535) — the  best  of  the  attributed  Van  der 
Weydens  at  Berlin. 

229-  \  Wolgemut,  Michael.    Altar-Piece.    These  four 

232    /  panels  of  an  altar-piece  show  much  brilliancy  of 

colour  and  also  indicate  the  Netherland  influence 


ZURBURAN,  FRANCISCO  DE  87 

of  some  painter  like  Bouts.  In  No.  229  the  Bouts 
influence  seems  apparent  in  the  colour  scheme  of 
the  sleeping  soldier  in  blue  and  yellow,  in  the  Christ, 
the  three  women,  the  landscape,  and  the  red- 
streaked  sky.  In  No.  230  the  landscape  is  cruder, 
the  colour  less  vivacious,  the  drawing  poorer,  as 
though  another  hand  were  at  work.  In  No.  231 
the  grouping  at  right,  the  colour,  the  distant  city 
all  suggest  a  crude  following  of  Bouts.  There  are 
figures  on  the  reverse  of  the  panels. 

580.  WynantS,  Jan.  Evening  Landscape.  This  is, 
perhaps,  better  than  its  companion  piece,  No.  579, 
but  is  still  a  cold  canvas  with  little  sentiment  or 
charm  about  it.  Landscape  in  Wynants's  hands 
was  usually  perfunctory  and  conventional.  The 
roadway,  the  trees,  the  patch  of  reflecting  water, 
the  spotty  ends  of  the  tree  trunks  are  almost  al- 
ways presented  in  an  uninspired  way. 

582.   Sand-Hills.    With    the   usual    porcelain    sky 

but  rather  interesting  in  the  foreground  work. 

Ysenbrandt,  Adriaen.    See  Isenbrant. 

1291.    Zurburan,  Francisco  de.     St.  Francis  of  Assist. 

A  well-painted  head,  said  to  be  in  the  late  style 
of  the  painter,  but  once  attributed  to  Guido  Reni. 


INDEX  OF  PICTURES  BY  NUMBERS 


1.   Master  Wilhelm  of  Co- 
logne. 
31 
4  I  Lochner. 

.*! 

6.   Lochner,  School  of. 
10.   Master  of  Heisterbach 
Altar. 


Bouts,  Dirck. 
114.   Bouts,  Albert. 


118.   David. 

133.   Orley,  B.  van. 


23 
24 
26 

Master  of  Life  of  Virgin. 

1*0. 

1481 
149 

.Dies. 
Lucas  van  Leyden. 

27 

28 

151  ; 
153  J 

>  Isenbrant. 

41 

42 

Master  of  St.  Severin. 

1551 

156  J 

>  Gossart. 

43.   Master  of  Kinsfolk  of 

157. 

Orley,  B.  van. 

Virgin. 

170. 

Hemessen. 

48 

Master  of  St.  Barthol- 

174. 

Schongauer. 

50 

omew  Altar. 

188' 

•  -;  '     • 

55 

189 

>  Strigel. 

56 

Cleve,  Juste  van. 

190 

.  •     .- 

57 

192. 

Maler  von  Ulm. 

60 

AO 

Master  of  Frankfort. 

193 

(MB 

68 

209 

Holbein  the  Elder. 

72 

Bruyn. 

211 

90 
91. 

Rhine,  School  of. 

212 
213 

Holbein  the  Younger. 

94.    French  School. 

214- 

1  -  • 

100 

218 

J  kcnaffner. 

101 
102 

Weyden,  Roger  van  der. 

219. 

Cologne,  School  of. 

103 

222A 

|  Burgkmair. 

90 


INDEX 


233.   Pleydenwurff. 

236- 

242 

244 

247 

248 

249 

251.   Weiditz. 


Durer. 


270 
271 
272 


Kulmbach. 


Cranach  the  Elder. 


275 

279. 

281.   Gninewald. 

286.   Baldung. 

2881 

289  >  Altdorfer. 

290  J 

292.  Apt. 

293.  Altdorfer. 
298   1 

298A  }  Pacher. 

298BJ 

3011 

302] 

^  |  Heist,  B.  van  der. 

324-1 

333   J  Rembrandt. 

|j;}LievenB. 


338  \  T,  i 

339  /  Bo1' 

345.  Rembrandt. 

347.  Wet,  Jac.  de. 

348.  Eeckhout. 
353.  Koninck. 


359.   Hals. 

370.  Ostade,  A.  van. 


390.   Sweerts. 

S)** 

407.  Dou. 

424.  Metsu. 

426.  Janssens. 

435.  Neer,  Eglon  van  der. 

472.  Potter. 

475.  Cuyp,  Aelbert. 

535.  Goyen,  J.  van. 


544 


Ruisdael,  J.  van. 


547 

551 

566.   Everdingen. 

570.   Hobbema. 


614.   Heyden,  J.  van  der. 
677.   Momper,  Joos  de. 
702.   Brueghel  the  Elder,  Jan. 


INDEX 


91 


Rubens. 


724 

726- 

730 

732- 

740 

742 

744 

745 

746 

748 

749 

751- 

754 

757- 

762 

764- 

779 

780 

782 

786 

788 

790 

794- 

800 

812.  Vos,  C.  de. 

813.  Jordaens. 
822- 

830 

833 

834 

837 

844 

845 

847 

849 

850 

861 

880.  'Brouwer. 

916.  Teniers. 


955.  Snyders. 
9811 

982  }  Giotto. 

983  j 

986.   Lippo  Memmi. 

988  I  Spinello  Aretino. 
^}Angelico,Fra. 

}{^j  Lippi,  Fra  Filippo. 

1008.  Lippi,  Filippino. 

1009.  Garbo,  R.  del. 

1010.  Botticelli. 

1011.  Ghirlandajo,  Dom. 
1016Alc     ,. 

1017    /Credl- 

1023.   Ferrara,  School  of. 

1026.   Palmezzano. 

10271 

1028] 

1032.   Basaiti. 


Catalan  School. 


Dyck,  Anthony  van. 


1034 

1035 

Perugino. 

1037 

1039 
1040 

Francia. 

1049 

1050 

Raphael. 

1051 

1052.   Romano,  Giulio. 

1058.   Pacchia. 

1066.   Sarto,  Andrea  del. 

1073.   Sodoma. 

1077.   Ghirlandajo,  R. 

3S}*"*- 

1083.   Lotto. 

1085.   Marconi. 

INDEX 


1094] 

1444. 

Bassano,  Jac. 

1107  }  Palma  Vecchio. 

1446. 

Beuckelaer. 

1108] 

1449. 

Bouts.  Dirck. 

fflrj»» 

H5ir(B^kmair- 

1120  1  -D 

1457. 

Cranach  the  Elder. 

1121  J  ^ordone- 

1462. 

Cranach  the  Younger. 

1123.   Moretto. 

1463. 

Cuyp,  B.  G. 

1127.    Tintoretto. 

1469. 

Engelbrechtsen. 

1128.   Tintoretto,  School  of. 

1470. 

French  School. 

1133 

1485. 

Greco,  11. 

1135    Veronese,  Paolo. 

1486. 

Griinewald. 

1137 

1487. 

Guardi. 

|J4g    Veronese,  P. 

1488. 
1490. 

Hals. 
Holbein  the  Younger. 

1150    Bassano,  Jac. 

1493. 
1495. 

Leonardo  da  Vinci, 
Liberale  da  Verona. 

J2gg    Canaletto  (B.Belotto) 

1496. 
1505. 

Licinio,  Bern. 
Moulins,  Master  of. 

1271.    Tiepolo. 

1508. 

Mazo. 

1291.   Zurburan. 

15111 

1C10   f 

Rhine  School. 

12Q3  1  Velasquez. 

J-O1  w   1 

1515. 

Muelich. 

1302.    Carreno. 

1518. 

Neer,  Aart  van  der. 

1304 
1305     M    m 

1539 
1540A 

Gaddi,  Agnolo. 

1306    Murmo- 
1308 

1543 
1543B 

Reichlich. 

1310.   Antolines. 

1561. 

Signorelli. 

1314.   Clouet,  Jean. 

1574. 

Tintoretto. 

1315.   Clouet,  F. 

1578. 

Traut. 

J325    Claude  Lorraine. 

15861 
1587  J 

Terborch. 

Eg    Baldung. 

1588. 
1590. 

Antonello  da  Messina. 
Apt. 

STAEDEL  INSTITUTE,  FRANKFORT 


NOTE  ON  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

THE  Frankfort  Gallery,  usually  known  as  the  Staedel 
Institute,  is  neither  very  large  nor  fully  representative 
of  the  schools  of  painting,  but  it  is,  nevertheless,  an 
interesting  gallery  because  of  some  unusual  pictures 
it  holds.  There  are  nearly  a  thousand  numbers,  and 
among  these  are  some  old  masters  of  fame  and  impor- 
tance. Here,  for  instance,  one  finds  the  name  piece  of 
the  Master  of  Fle*malle,  the  Lucca  Madonna  by  Jan 
van  Eyck,  two  interesting  panels  attributed  to  Gerard 
David,  an  excellent  picture  ascribed  to  Christus,  a 
good  portrait  by  Memling,  a  large  altar-piece  by  Cra- 
nach,  some  panels  given  to  Diirer.  Here,  too,  is  a 
huge  canvas  of  Samson  and  Delilah  usually  accepted 
as  a  Rembrandt,  two  very  good  portraits  by  Bol,  an 
interior  by  Gelder,  portraits  by  Hals,  genre  pieces  by 
Brouwer,  a  King  David  by  Rubens. 

Most  surprising  of  all,  one  finds  in  this  gallery  some 
excellent  and  rare  Italian  pictures.  The  Portrait  of  a 
Young  Woman  by  Bartolommeo  Veneziano  is  repro- 
duced as  the  frontispiece  of  this  volume,  the  Carpaccio 
of  the  Madonna  and  Child  is  well  known  and  a  fine 
picture,  the  Fiorenzo  and  the  Perugino  are  both  excel- 
lent works,  and  the  two  large  Morettos  are  of  unusual 
quality.  Perhaps  the  most  interesting  Italian  picture 

95 


96        NOTE  ON  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

in  the  gallery  is  the  Palma,  Resting  Nymphs.  It  is 
not  only  excellent  but  it  is  puzzling  to  trace  in  its  ante- 
cedents and  in  its  suggestion  of  things  Giorgionesque. 
There  are  many  other  Italian  pictures  in  the  gallery 
that  will  bear  study.  The  collection  is  growing  rapidly. 
It  is  by  no  means  negligible,  and  the  student  passing 
from  Germany  to  France  or  going  down  the  Rhine  will 
do  well  to  give  at  least  two  days  to  it. 

The  Institute  building  is  spacious  and  imposing  if  a 
little  tedious  in  its  bad  taste.  But  the  light  is  very 
good,  the  pictures  well  hung,  and  for  the  rest  the  visitor 
need  not  be  too  exacting.  The  unabridged  catalogue 
(in  German)  has  notes  of  critical  value  that  should  be 
consulted  and,  in  the  main,  accepted. 

There  is  a  Municipal  Historical  Museum  at  Frank- 
fort which  contains  a  few  early  German  masters  that 
should  be  seen  if  possible.  Darmstadt  is  only  half  an 
hour  by  train  from  Frankfort,  and  the  student  should 
go  there  to  see  Holbein's  Burgomaster  Meyer  Madonna 
in  the  Ducal  palace  and  also  the  pictures  in  the  Darm- 
stadt Museum,  especially  those  by  Backer  and  Bernaert 
Fabritius,  with  two  pictures  attributed  respectively  to 
Rembrandt  and  Maes.  The  museum  is  admirably  ar- 
ranged and  contains  many  pictures  of  importance. 


STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 
FRANKFORT 

639.    Aertsen,    Pieter.     Christ    and    the    Adulteress. 

The  figures  at  the  back  are  excellent  in  colour  and 
in  arrangement.  Those  in  the  foreground  are,  of 
course,  not  interested  in  the  background  happen- 
ing. They  are  rustic  folk  selling  produce,  strongly 
drawn,  and  just  as  strongly  painted.  Look  at  their 
heads  and  hands  with  the  colours  of  the  dresses. 
And  what  still-life  painting!  This  latter  is,  of 
course,  Aertsen's  metier.  He  is  a  painter  of  still- 
life  with  figures,  and  the  incidents  put  in  at  the 
back  give  a  name  to  the  picture  and  are  helpful 
in  producing  a  decorative  pattern. 

7.    Angelico,  Fra.     Madonna  Enthroned  with  Angels. 

A  pretty  circle  of  angels  in  Fra  Angelico's  manner 
but  probably  by  some  assistant.  It  has  not  the 
largeness  nor  the  skill  of  the  master  himself.  Nor 
is  the  sentiment  entirely  his.  A  handsome  little 
picture,  nevertheless. 

659.    Antwerp,    School    of.      Adoration    of  Kings.      It 

has  a  look  of  Herri  met  de  Bles,  but  this  is,  perhaps, 
misleading.  Probably  a  school  piece  of  the  Bles 
time  or  later,  done  with  some  skill  but  with  little 
spirit  or  fine  feeling. 

73.    Baldung,  Hans.     Witches'    Sabbath.     It    is    in 

Baldung's  style,  with  good  outline  drawing  and 
97 


;  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

colour.  Whatever  this  painter's  failings  may  be 
(he  often  produced  "forced"  effects),  he  is  not 
commonplace  in  theme  or  in  treatment.  What 
body  and  weight  in  the  seated  figure!  See  also 
No.  73*. 

13.  Bartolommeo  Veneziano.  Portrait  of  a  Young 
*  Woman.  This,  as  an  early  example  of  Bartolommeo 
and,  in  itself,  as  a  study  in  whites,  is  one  of  the 
most  interesting  pictures  in  the  gallery.  It  was 
thought  at  one  time  to  be  by  Albrecht  Diirer  be- 
cause of  the  German  feeling  in  it,  but  Morelli 
rightly  gave  it  to  Bartolommeo  without  saying  any- 
thing about  his  German  influences.  Critics  do  not 
allow  of  his  ever  having  had  any,  but  surely  they 
are  apparent  here  in  the  type  and  the  drawing, 
especially  in  the  drawing  of  the  hair.  The  portrait 
belongs  in  the  same  class  with  the  Daughter  of  He- 
rodias  at  Dresden  (No.  201A) — both  of  them  sug- 
gesting Northern  influence.  Very  interesting  in 
its  whites,  in  its  facial  outline,  its  drawing  of  the 
bay-leaves,  its  painting  of  the  flowers.  A  hand- 
some work  in  spite  of  its  oddity,  and  in  spite  of  sad 
repainting,  showing  so  conspicuously  in  the  hand, 
the  face,  the  figure. 

35.  Bellini,  Giovanni.  Madonna,  Child,  St.  Eliza- 
beth, and  St.  John.  This  looks  like  a  Bellini  school 
piece — the  sort  of  thing  done  by  a  pupil,  possibly 
after  one  of  Bellini's  designs,  and  with  so  much 
good  work  about  it  that  the  master  felt  no  com- 
punctions in  allowing  his  name  to  go  on  it.  It  is, 
perhaps,  lacking  in  feeling  and  is  a  little  hard  and 
mechanical  in  method,  but  one  can  find  little  fault 
with  the  drawing,  the  colour,  the  types.  They  are 
Bellinesque  to  a  deceptive  degree.  The  Madonna 


BOL,  FERDINAND  99 

in  her  white  head-dress  is  attractive.  The  dark- 
skinned  figures  on  either  side  of  her  enhance  her 
beauty  by  contrast.  How  well  the  hands  of  the 
St.  John  are  drawn  and  the  hah*  of  the  Child  is 
painted!  It  is  good  work  but  not  inspired  by  any 
deep  emotion.  The  suggestion  of  Rondinelli  offered 
by  the  catalogue  is  pertinent. 

701.  Belotto,  Bernardo.  Dresden.  Done  with  a  good 
deal  of  feeling  for  the  lift  of  the  sky,  for  colour, 
for  the  relations  of  light  and  shade.  But  Belotto 
is  seen  at  his  best  only  in  the  Vienna  Gallery. 
There  he  is  a  wonder  and  a  surprise. 

184.    Bol,    Ferdinand.     Portrait    of   a    Young    Man. 

This  is  as  good  a  picture  intrinsically  as  any  so- 
called  Rembrandt  in  the  gallery,  and  yet  it  is 
signed  as  a  Bol — a  signature  we  cannot  doubt 
because  Bol  was  not  great  enough  as  a  painter  to 
make  it  worth  while  to  forge  his  name  upon  can- 
vases. Besides,  it  gives  evidence  of  being  a  genu- 
ine Bol.  And  will  you  look  at  it  closely  for  a 
few  minutes  to  see  how  much  it  looks  like  a 
genuine  Rembrandt?  It  is  weak  in  the  drawing 
and  modelling  of  the  forehead,  chin,  eyes,  nose, 
hands;  but  it  makes  a  very  good  pretence  at  the 
Rembrandtesque,  and  one  can  understand  how  it 
could  be  mistaken  for  a  Rembrandt.  See  also  the 
smoother  Bol,  No.  185. 

658.  The  Philosopher.  Here  is  another  Rem- 
brandtesque Bol  done  with  good  colour  and  draw- 
ing. The  left  hand  is  like  that  of  Abraham  over 
the  face  of  Isaac  in  the  Abraham's  Sacrifice  at 
Munich  (No.  332),  assigned  to  Rembrandt  but 
probably  by  Bol.  A  very  good  picture,  but  in  al- 
most all  of  the  pictures  left  to  Bol  in  the  European 


100  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

galleries  one  feels  the  attempt  at  strength  which 
ends  rather  weakly  compared  with  the  man  he 
followed — Rembrandt. 

18.    Bonsignori,    Francesco.     An    Apostle.     It    has 

some  strength  of  drawing  and  depth  of  colour. 
The  handsome  architectural  frame  about  the  figure 
reminds  one  of  Mantegna,  of  Gentile  Bellini,  of 
Crivelli,  of  Ferrarese  art.  An  interesting  picture 
now  somewhat  darkened.  Put  down  earlier  as  by 
Mantegna,  probably  because  of  the  inscription  on 
the  ledge,  but  he  did  not  paint  the  picture.  It 
comes  nearer  to  Justus  of  Ghent  than  any  one  else. 

11.  Botticelli,    Sandro.      Portrait  of  a  Woman.      See 

the  catalogue  note  for  the  identity  of  the  sitter. 
It  looks  more  like  an  idealised  head  of  some  Virtue 
or  classical  character  than  the  exact  likeness  of  a 
Florentine  woman.  It  is  given  with  spirit  and 
truth  of  outline  drawing.  There  is  a  swing  of  line 
in  the  head  and  bust  which  the  coil  of  pearls  about 
the  shoulders  and  the  necklace  seem  to  emphasise. 
The  profile  is  well  done  especially  in  the  nose  and 
mouth.  And  notwithstanding  its  meagre  use  of 
light-and-shade,  there  is  a  roundness  to  the  figure. 
But  it  is  not  a  Botticelli  original. 

12.    Madonna,    Child,  and    St.    John.     There    are 

versions  of  this  picture  in  other  European  galleries. 
They  are  all  originals  or  replicas  and  by  no  chance 
mere  copies,  according  to  the  various  catalogues. 
This  one  is  probably  a  school  piece  done  with  some 
sharpness  and  crudity  of  outline.     Notice,  for  in- 
stance, the  jaw  line  and  arms  of  the  St.  John.     The 
Botticelli  sentiment  and  colour  are  present  but  not 
his  peculiar  quality. 


BROL1  WEH,  &ppV          '».  101 

97.    Bouts,  Thierri.      Vision  of  the  Emperor  Augustus. 

This  picture  is  in  the  style  of  Bouts  but  somewhat 
feeble  and  laboured  for  that  master.  Several  of 
the  heads  have  been  changed  upon  the  panel  as  the 
outlines  still  indicate,  the  drawing  of  some  of  the 
faces  and  hands  is  not  good,  the  Emperor  is  a 
marvel  of  awkward  line,  the  figure  in  black  at 
the  right  is  flat  and  his  red  sleeve  unbelievable; 
the  dog,  the  sheep,  the  buildings,  the  landscape 
are  all  poorly  done.  In  addition  we  miss  the  Bouts 
brilliancy  of  colour,  his  fine  robes  and  jewelling. 
It  is  possibly  a  shop  piece  or  the  work  of  a  follower. 

108A.  Madonna  and  Child.  The  picture  was  for- 
merly attributed  to  Memling  but  is  now  given  to 
Bouts  by  the  catalogue.  It  probably  came  from 
neither  painter  directly.  A  work  with  some  feel- 
ing and  good  colour  about  it.  Other  pictures,  sim- 
ilar in  type  and  colour,  in  the  Berlin  and  London 
Galleries  are  put  down  to  Bouts,  Memling,  and  Van 
der  Goes.  This  Madonna  with  a  bumpy  forehead 
seems  difficult  to  locate. 

149.  Brouwer,  Adriaen.  The  Bitter  Drink.  An  ex- 
cellent sketch  by  a  most  capable  painter.  Brouwer 
seems  to  have  played  with  it,  rubbed  it  with  his 
thumb,  stirred  it  with  his  forefinger  into  a  resem- 
blance of  life.  Look  at  the  drawing  of  the  mouth, 
the  hair,  the  hat,  the  hand,  the  cup.  And  what 
good  colour! 

147.   Operation  on  the  Foot.     Excellent  work  if  not 

very  pleasing  or  elevating  in  theme.  Brouwer 
never  makes  a  pretence  of  elevating  the  masses  or 
bettering  the  race.  He  is  simply  a  good  painter 
with  an  eye  for  colour  and  pictorial  effect.  These 


102  THE  Si'AEDEL  INSTITUTE 

he  gets  from  peasants  better  than  from  people  of 
high  life.     See  also  his  No.  148. 

122c.  Brueghel  the  Elder,  Jan  (Velvet).  Landscape. 
One  of  the  picturesque  little  scraps  of  landscape 
that  this  Brueghel  did  many  times  and  with  very 
enjoyable  results. 

95 1  Bruyn,    Bart.     Portraits   of  Man   and   Woman. 
96  J  They  are  typical  Bruyns,  good  in  decorative  qual- 
ity  but   not   especially   forceful,    though   honest, 
truthful  work. 

21.  CarotO,  Francesco.  Madonna  and  Child.  This 
is  not  a  remarkable  picture  in  any  way  but  it  has 
some  good  feeling  and  good  workmanship  about 
it.  The  Child's  figure  is  well  drawn  and  the  colour 
is  acceptable. 

38.  Carpaccio,  Vittore.  Madonna,  Child,  and  St. 
John.  Here  is  a  well-known  Carpaccio,  of  the 
painter's  early  period,  and  done  in  his  frankly  awk- 
ward manner,  as  witness  the  drawing  of  the  faces 
or  the  Madonna's  hands  or  the  Child's  legs.  It  is 
naive,  too,  in  feeling,  as  may  be  seen  in  the  girlish 
Madonna  and  the  two  odd-looking  children — the 
Christ  child  with  the  cap,  book,  and  slippers  of  a 
Venetian  child.  How  often  in  Italian  art  does  the 
Child  appear  in  the  costume  of  the  time  and  coun- 
try— that  is,  Venetian  costume!  What  very  good 
colour!  It  is  mellow  all  through  and  in  perfect 
harmony  with  the  justly  valued  whites  of  the  head- 
dress. And  what  a  charming  landscape!  A  fine 
picture  and  representing  truly  the  Carpaccio  spirit. 

36.  Catena,  Vincenzo.  St.  Jerome.  Said  to  be  a 
replica  of  the  picture  in  the  London  National  Gal- 
lery (No.  694)  with  variations.  It  may  be  a  school 
copy. 


CIMA  DA  CONEGLIANO  .        103 

99.    Christus,     Petrus.     Madonna,     Child,  and    St. 

*  Jerome.  This  picture  considered  as  a  Christus — 
and  it  is  as  well  authenticated  as  any  Christus  in 
the  European  galleries — simply  emphasises  the  va- 
rious and  divergent  views  held  about  this  painter 
at  the  present  time.  There  are  really  few  data  by 
which  to  judge  or  attribute  his  works,  except  the 
dates  and  signatures  on  the  pictures.  This  pic- 
ture is  something  emanating  from  the  Van  Eyck 
School  to  which,  probably,  Christus  belonged. 
The  catalogue  points  out  that  the  Adam  and  Eve 
on  the  arms  of  the  throne  are  similar  to  the  work 
of  the  Van  Eycks,  which  indicates  the  Van  Eyck 
influence  even  if  the  Madonna  and  Child  do  not. 
It  is  a  fine  picture  and  almost  worthy  of  the  Van 
Eycks  themselves  (see  the  Van  Eyck,  No.  98)  save 
for  the  want  of  precise  modelling  in  the  heads  and 
hands.  The  baldachin  is  beautifully  done,  and 
the  indicated  landscape  is  excellent.  What  true 
tone  and  colour!  What  fine  robes  and  what  a  good 
interior!  The  sentiment  is  not  very  profound  and 
the  faces  are  a  little  heavy,  but  for  the  rest  it  is 
excellent.  The  picture  is  dated  1457,  which  would 
make  it  the  latest  of  the  assigned  Christus  pic- 
tures. 

40.  Cima  da  Conegliano.  Madonna,  St.  Catherine, 
and  St.  Nicholas  of  Bari.  Not  a  remarkable  Cima 
in  any  way.  It  seems  to  be  true  in  tone  and  has 
a  good  landscape,  but  the  surface  looks  somewhat 
dead  as  though  it  might  be  much  repainted. 

39.  Madonna  and  Child.  A  very  sad-faced  Ma- 
donna with  small  eyes  and  mouth,  a  neck  that 
does  not  fit  too  well  on  the  body,  and  a  prettily 
turned  head-dress.  The  large-headed  Child  has 


104  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

animation,  and  the  landscape  seen  through  the  win- 
dow is  excellent.  The  figures  are  placed  in  the 
centre  of  the  panel  with  no  attempt  at  subtlety  in 
the  grouping.  It  is  an  ordinary  Cima. 

93.  Cleve,  Juste  van  der  Beke  van  (Master  of 
Death  of  Virgin).  Altar-Piece.  A  triptych  with 
a  Pieta  in  the  central  panel  and  saints  in  the  side 
panels.  There  is  trite  sentiment  about  it  and  a 
great  deal  of  ordinary  workmanship.  The  drawing 
is  fairly  effective,  but  the  colour  has  slight  depth 
to  it.  The  blue-greens  of  the  dark  landscapes  have 
something  to  them  that  suggests  the  tragic  nature 
of  the  scene.  There  are  interesting  little  figures 
at  the  back — among  them  Judas  hanging  from  a 
tree.  Not  a  great  work. 

58A.    Coello,    Claudio.       Charles   II  of  Spain.      It   is 

another  version  of  the  larger  picture  at  Madrid 
(No.  648),  there  put  down  to  Carrefio  de  Miranda. 
This  version  shows  more  display  of  colour  and 
dress.  It  is  a  fairly  good  portrait. 

22A.  Correggio,  Antonio  Allegri  da.  Madonna, 
Child,  and  St.  John.  It  is  not  a  picture  that  can 
be  regarded  with  any  satisfaction  in  its  present 
condition.  As  any  one  can  see,  it  has  been  re- 
painted (in  the  hands,  faces,  figures)  and  then 
rubbed  down.  It  now  reveals  a  pitted  and  cracked 
surface.  The  rather  weak  and  sentimental  spirit 
that  Correggio  put  into  his  Madonna  pictures  is 
here.  The  pyramidal  composition  is  restful,  the 
lines  of  the  children's  figures  are  graceful,  and  the 
arrangement  of  hands  and  arms  is  attractive. 
Perhaps  there  is  too  much  grace  for  strength.  But 
the  technique  of  the  picture  is  stronger  than  its 
sentiment. 


CRIVELLI,  CARLO  105 

87.  Cranach  the  Elder,  Lucas.     Crucifixion.    Notice 
the  lovely  figure  of  the  Magdalen  in  green  at  the 
foot   of   the   cross.     The   figures   below   are   well 
grouped  and  are  fine  in  colour.     How  the  thieves 
hang  from  the  crosses!     The  Christ  recalls  Durer's 
Christ  on  the  Cross  at  Dresden  (No.  1870).     The 
whole  scene  (types  and  all)  is  very  different  from 
the  Crucifixion  at  Munich  (No.  1457),  attributed 
to  Cranach. 

88.   Venus.     The  repetition  of  a  theme  much  used 

by  the  elder  Cranach  and  also  by  his  pupils.     The 
outline  is  graceful,  though  the  figure  may  seem 
awkward  as  realistic  presentation. 

655.  The  Kinsfolk  of  the  Virgin.  A  large  altar- 
piece  not  too  successfully  handled.  The  arrange- 
ment of  figures  in  the  central  panel  is  in  three  rows 
of  three  figures  each,  and  in  the  side  panels  of 
two  figures  each,  placed  diagonally  on  the  panels. 
This  formality,  with  the  "jumpy"  floor  and  the 
protruding  grey  walls,  is  very  disturbing.  The  pic- 
ture has  been  injured  by  repainting  and  was  pos- 
sibly not  by  Cranach  in  the  first  place,  though  it 
may  be  an  early  work  by  him.  The  drawing  is 
not  very  good,  nor  the  colour  too  fine  in  quality. 
The  children  are  amusing.  On  the  outside  of  the 
wings  are  figures  of  St.  Anne  and  the  Madonna. 
The  whole  work  is  probably  of  shop  origin. 

33  1  Crivelli,  Carlo.     The  Annunciation.    Two  small 

34  J  panels  of  some  decorative  beauty.     The  angel  with 

the  wry  face  is  shown  in  waving  garments  against 
an  architectural  background  that  is  not  quite  right 
in  its  drawing.  The  Madonna  is  kneeling  in  a  well- 
set  room,  with  curtains,  bed,  wall,  ceiling,  all  of 
them  well  enough  drawn.  The  light  is  coming 


106  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

through  the  window  grating,  as  in  the  National 
Gallery  picture  (No.  739).  At  the  top  a  rug  and 
a  jug  fill  in  the  space  gracefully.  Two  parts  of 
an  altar-piece.  See  the  catalogue  note  upon  them. 

307.  Cuyp,   Aelbert.     The  Meadow.     With  a  warm 
sunset  light,  a  high  sky,  and  drifting  clouds.     Not 
perhaps  the  best  of  Cuyps,  but  certainly  an  agree- 
able kind  of  art.     Cuyp  reproduced  this  sunlight 
and  river  effect  many  times.     See  also  No.  308A. 

308.  Cuyp,  Jacob  G.    Portrait  of  a  Child.    Attrac- 
tive in  its  colour,  but  thinly  painted  and  weakly 
drawn.     It  is  not  so  good  as  the  De  Vos  (No.  131) 
— not  so  well  done  technically. 

108.  David,  Gerard.  St.  Jerome.  A  very  good  little 
*  picture  that  may  not  be  rightly  attributed,  but 
is  true  enough  as  art.  It  is  picturesque  in  the  lit- 
tle lake,  the  rocks,  the  trees,  the  sky.  The  figure 
kneels  well  and  is  well  drawn  in  the  head  and 
hands.  The  robe  on  the  ground  and  the  picture 
on  the  tree  trunk  lend  spots  of  bright  colour.  It  is 
decidedly  better  in  spirit  than  the  works  in  Euro- 
pean galleries  usually  attributed  to  David,  Isen- 
brant,  or  Patinir.  See  also  No.  110. 

110.  Annunciation.  Both  the  spirit  and  the  tech- 
nique of  this  picture  seem  in  flat  contradiction  of 
No.  108,  and  the  two  are  hardly  to  be  reconciled 
by  attributing  them  to  different  periods  of  the 
painter's  career.  The  angel  is  a  little  dramatic, 
the  heads  and  hands  are  sharp  in  line  and  pasty  in 
colour,  the  drapery  is  formal,  hard,  blackish  in 
hue.  By  no  means  of  the  same  or  similar  quality 
as  No.  108.  Stand  back  in  the  room  where  you 
can  see  both  pictures  together.  Yet  this  No.  110 


EECKHOUT,  GERBRANDT  VAN  DEN    107 

is,  perhaps,  more  like  the  usually  accepted  David 
than  No.  108. 

83.  Diirer,  Albrecht.  Job.  Even  if  this  were  a  well- 
authenticated  Diirer,  one  would  hardly  be  justified 
in  falling  down  in  worship  before  it.  The  Job  is 
well  enough  drawn  and  has  an  attractive  dark  rim 
about  the  legs,  arms,  and  hands.  And  the  figure 
in  red  has  some  interest  as  colour.  But  the  picture 
is  not  to  be  raved  over  or  set  down  to  Diirer  with- 
out reservations. 

85.    Portrait  of  Katharina  Furlegerin.     Whatever 

its  history  or  whatever  may  be  under  its  present 
surface,  there  is  very  little  Diirer  in  it  now.  The 
hands  and  faces  show  drawing  of  his  kind,  but 
they  seem  to  have  been  carefully  gone  over  with 
some  sort  of  a  small  brush  and  a  palette  of  muddy 
colour.  The  hair  and  the  background  are  not  his 
at  all.  It  looks  like  a  modern  attempt  to  paint  a 
Diirer. 

144A.  Dyck,  Anthony  van.  Portrait  of  Hendrik  du 
Bois.  The  head  is  well  drawn,  especially  in  the 
forehead,  eyes,  nose,  and  mouth — features  which 
Van  Dyck  understood  and  drew  with  astonishing 
skill.  And  the  head  is  well  placed  on  the  body. 
The  hand  is  not  exactly  Van  Dyck's,  and  the  cloak 
might  have  been  done  by  almost  any  one,  but  both 
of  them  are  well  enough  done.  Van  Dyck  at  times 
did  poorer  work  than  this. 

188.  Eeckhout,  Gerbrandt  van  den.  Portrait  of 
Isaac  Commelin.  This  painter's  works  have  been 
so  juggled  with  and  handed  around  under  the 
name  of  Rembrandt  that  it  is  difficult  to  establish 
a  definite  idea  of  his  portraiture.  This  portrait, 


108  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

for  instance,  is  very  different  from  his  figure  work, 
yet  it  is  signed  and  is  probably  by  Eeckhout.  It 
is  a  very  good  little  portrait,  carefully  drawn  and 
easily  painted.  It  is  not  a  wonder,  but  it  seems 
an  unusual  performance  for  Eeckhout — something 
one  comes  up  to  with  surprise. 

98.  Eyck,  Jan  van.  Madonna  and  Child  (The  Lucca 
*  Madonna).  A  picture  of  charm,  feeling,  and 
beauty.  For  Early  Flemish  craftsmanship  it  has, 
perhaps,  few  superiors.  Every  feature  of  it  is 
done  skilfully  and  exactly.  The  figure  is  large 
in  the  mass,  is  well  placed  in  an  ample  room,  well 
lighted,  well  drawn,  and  well  painted.  The  draw- 
ing has  been  hurt  a  little  in  the  head,  hair,  and 
hands,  but  still  shows  well  in  the  outline  and 
modelling  of  the  Child's  head,  the  Madonna's  face, 
her  hair  and  robe.  Notice  the  detail  work  in  the 
jewels  of  the  robe  borders,  or  the  band  about  the 
head,  or  the  basin,  bottle,  and  window-panes.  No- 
tice, again,  the  depth  and  beauty  of  the  red,  the 
pattern  and  colour  of  the  baldachin  at  the  back. 
How  absolutely  they  are  placed  in  that  light  from 
the  window  and  that  air  of  the  room !  A  notable 
picture  in  its  skill  without  being  a  great  work. 
It  is  a  version  or  variation  of  the  central  panel  of 
the  Bruges  Van  Eyck,  and  is  assigned  by  some 
critics  to  Petrus  Christus.  Compare  it  with  No. 
99. 

197.  Fabritius,  Bernaert.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  Here 
is  probably  a  fair  example  of  a  painter  whose  pic- 
tures one  finds — where?  They  are  seldom  seen  in 
galleries  and  one  wonders  if  most  of  his  work  is 
not  down  under  the  name  of  Rembrandt.  He  cul- 
tivated depth  of  colour,  blackness  of  shadow,  flat- 


GIROLAMO  DI  BENVENUTO  109 

ness  of  brush-work,  paleness  of  high  lights.  There 
is  an  example  of  his  work  at  Dresden  (No.  159)  and 
also  two  works  in  the  Darmstadt  Gallery.  This 
Frankfort  picture  seems  early  and  somewhat  im- 
mature. A  good  portrait,  especially  in  colour. 

15.  Fiorenzo  di  Lorenzo.  Madonna,  Child,  and 
*  Saints.  The  patterned  gold  ground  gives  the  pic- 
ture richness  and  decorative  value  at  the  start. 
The  Madonna  is  a  flat  figure  placed  upon  the  gold, 
counting  for  something  as  sentiment  and  colour, 
but  not  very  truthful  as  drawing.  The  saints  at 
the  left  have  better  relief,  and  the  St.  Sebastian 
is  handsome  as  outline.  He  is  a  pathetic  creature 
in  every  way.  Notice  the  good  colours  of  red  and 
blue  in  the  St.  Christopher.  How  well  he  stands 
with  his  stiff  legs!  A  picture  of  much  interest. 

22.    Garofalo  (Benvenuto  Tisi).    Holy  Family.    It 

is  an  unusual  interior  for  Garofalo  and  very  good 
in  its  light,  its  setting,  its  floor,  and  its  little  garden 
at  the  back.  The  forlorn  Joseph  is  well  painted, 
as  also  the  Madonna.  The  Child  is  monstrous  in 
size — a  young  Hercules,  in  fact.  There  is  good 
colour  in  the  greens  and  blues. 

193.    Gelder,  Aert  de.      The  Painter  in  His  Workshop. 

In  De  Gelder's  style  and  a  repetition  of  his  conven- 
tion of  a  sacrificed  figure  at  the  side.  The  colour 
is  good,  and  the  drawing  not  as  bad  as  usual,  per- 
haps. The  palette  is  interesting  as  showing  some 
of  the  colours  used  by  the  Dutch  painters.  The 
painter  figure  holding  the  palette  has  a  realistic  ap- 
pearance. 

5.    Girolamo  di  Benvenuto.     Crucifixion.     A  trip- 
tych done  in  distemper,  with  sincerity  of  feeling 


110  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

though  crude  in  drawing.  The  landscape  is  wide, 
the  colour  good,  the  composition  satisfactory. 

111.  Goes,  Hugo  van  der.  A  Triptych.  The  middle 
panel  of  the  Madonna  and  Child  is  by  a  different 
hand  from  the  side  panels.  The  latter  are  poorly 
done  by  comparison.  The  central  panel  may  be 
by  Van  der  Goes,  as  claimed,  and  still  not  be 
startling  as  a  work  of  art.  One  may  regard  it  with 
perfect  calmness.  The  coats  of  arms  on  the  frame 
are  as  interesting  as  the  paintings. 

242s.  Goyen,  Jan  van.  Path  in  the  Dunes.  A  grey 
scene  with  good  colour,  good  sky,  and  good  air. 

173  \  Hals,    Frans.      Portraits  of  a  Man   and  Woman. 

174  /  The  man's  portrait  is  excellent,  being  done  with 
*       swiftness,  sureness,  and  truth.     How  well  the  face 

is  given  with  the  well-drawn,  penetrating  eyes,  the 
riotous  moustache,  the  black  hat,  and  all  that!  It 
is  skimped  a  little  in  the  jaw  and  chin  and  guessed 
at  in  the  hands,  but  full-rounded  in  the  body,  with 
an  excellent  ruff  and  black  coat.  The  figure  fits 
into  the  oval  of  the  frame  exactly.  One  feels  that 
the  woman's  portrait  is  less  well  placed  on  the 
panel — fills  the  space  less  perfectly.  It  wants 
something  at  the  sides  and  top.  But  how  cleverly 
it  is  painted!  The  curious  drawing  of  the  mouth 
gives  it  life  and  character.  What  a  white  in  the 
head-dress!  And  what  a  ruff,  travelling  as  it  does 
about  the  neck!  The  dress  and  hands  are  more 
carefully  done  than  in  the  man's  portrait.  They 
are  both  spirited,  lifelike  impersonations  and  rep- 
resent Hals  very  well. 

291A.    Hobbema,  Meindert.   Fisherman's  Huts.    How 

very  much  to  be  preferred  are  these  small,  sketchy 


JANSSENS,  P.  ELINGA  111 

pictures  by  Hobbema,  done  evidently  from  the 
scene  before  him,  to  those  tedious  water-mills  that 
he  did  out  of  his  head  with  unvarying  monotony! 
What  spirit  it  has!  What  wind  and  clouds  are 
here! 

71.  Holbein  the  Younger,  Hans.  Portrait  of  Sir 
George  Cromwell.  A  good  portrait,  with  what 
is  called  "a  Clouet  look"  about  it  that  may  be 
something  more  than  a  mere  superficial  resem- 
blance. The  drawing  is  a  little  soft  for  Holbein, 
and  the  handling  is,  perhaps,  too  finical  for  him. 
Notice  this  soft  drawing  not  only  in  the  outline  of 
the  face,  but  in  the  eyes,  mouth,  ear,  and  hand. 
Notice  the  smoothness  of  the  brush  in  the  hair,  the 
beard,  the  flowers,  the  hat,  the  feather.  This  may 
be  Holbein  in  his  last  years,  as  the  catalogue  sug- 
gests, but  it  is  more  like  a  following  of  his  work 
by  some  imitator. 

217.  Janssens,  P.  Elinga.  Holland  Interior.  This 
picture  once  served  time  as  a  Pieter  de  Hooch,  but 
is  now  given  to  Janssens,  where  it  perhaps  rightly 
belongs.  It  is  a  fairly  good  picture,  though  a  bit 
spotty  in  its  lights,  and  overdone  in  such  features, 
for  instance,  as  the  mirror  on  the  wall  or  the  sun- 
light on  the  floor.  How  badly  the  mirror  frame  is 
done!  The  picture  has  not  the  quality  of  Pieter 
de  Hooch,  but  it  seems  to  have  some  of  the  man- 
nerisms of  certain  pictures  at  Amsterdam,  The 
Hague,  and  London  that  are  now  masquerading 
under  the  name  of  Vermeer  of  Delft.  The  doing 
of  the  spotty  chair-nails  and  the  mirror  is  like 
that  in  the  Vermeers  mentioned!  See  the  notes 
upon  them,  and  also  in  this  gallery  the  note  upon 
the  Vermeer,  No.  217A. 


112  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

20.  Lombard  School.  St.  Catherine.  A  handsome 
little  picture  without  a  parent,  or,  at  least,  not  one 
that  any  two  people  can  agree  upon.  As  it  stands 
at  present  it  is  a  pretty  harmony  of  greens — it 
might  almost  be  called  a  symphony. 

19.  Macrino  d'Alba.  Altar-Piece.  An  important 
triptych  by  a  painter  whose  pictures  are  not  fre- 
quently seen  in  European  galleries.  He  was  influ- 
enced by  Leonardo  and  the  Milanese,  but  was  not 
the  strongest  or  most  famous  of  the  Leonardo  fol- 
lowers. The  central  panel  here  shows  the  Ma- 
donna and  Child  in  a  rather  fine  landscape.  The 
figures  are  not  very  well  drawn  (see  the  hands), 
and  the  outlines  are  sharply  cut.  The  drapery  is 
prettily  disposed  in  the  loops  of  the  blue  at  the 
sleeves,  but  the  red  robe  is  wooden.  The  action 
is  graceful  but  not  realistic,  for  the  Madonna  holds 
neither  the  Child  nor  the  book  in  a  convincing 
manner.  The  St.  Joachim  and  St.  Anne  in  the 
right  panel  seem  better  done  than  the  Madonna 
as  regards  their  heads  and  hands,  but  are  just  as 
sharp  in  the  drawing  of  their  robes.  This  is  equally 
true  of  the  left  panel.  The  trees,  water,  and  sky 
seem  hard.  The  sentiment  is  a  little  frail.  Some- 
what injured. 

102-  1  Master  of   FISmalle.      Wings  of  an  Altar-Piece. 

104  /  These  panels  came  from  the  Abbey  of  Flemalle, 
*  and  it  is  from  them  and  their  place  of  finding  that 
the  Master  of  Flemalle  takes  his  name.  The 
Trinity  (No.  102)  is  in  grisaille,  and  is  the  reverse 
of  the  St.  Veronica  panel  (No.  103).  On  the  re- 
verse of  No.  104  there  is  also  a  Madonna  Dolorosa 
in  grisaille,  of  later  and  inferior  workmanship. 
The  St.  Veronica  and  Madonna  and  Child  (Nos. 


MASTER  OF  FRANKFORT  113 

103  and  104)  are  carefully  done,  with  almost  pain- 
ful accuracy  in  the  heads  and  hands,  the  haloes, 
the  jewels,  flowers,  leaves,  and  background  patterns. 
They  are  very  elaborately  executed  for  such  large 
figures,  and  yet  in  spite  of  it  they  are  not  finical 
or  fussy.  St.  Veronica  seems  small  of  stature, 
with  a  fine  white  head-dress  and  beautiful  red  and 
green  robes.  The  Madonna,  in  white  with  blue 
shadows  on  the  white,  is  a  little  uneasy  so  far  as  her 
drapery  is  concerned,  but  she  is  not  only  lovely  in 
her  sincerity  and  honesty  of  feeling,  but  queenly 
in  dignity  and  elevation  of  spirit.  She  is  directly 
and  closely  related  to  the  figures  that  are  now  being 
attributed  to  the  "School  of  Robert  Campin"  in 
the  National  Gallery,  London  (notably  No  654). 
The  type  is  practically  the  same. 

L05.    The  Thief  on  the  Cross.     This  is  part  of  an 

altar-piece  of  the  Crucifixion.  The  Liverpool  Gal- 
lery has  what  is  thought  to  be  a  copy  of  the  whole 
scene  of  the  Crucifixion.  The  right  wing  of  it 
shows  these  figures  of  the  Frankfort  panels  in  their 
entirety.  The  gold  ground  of  this  Frankfort  bit 
has  been  hurt  in  some  way  so  that  it  now  has  a 
fumbled  look.  The  figures  are  interesting  but  have 
been  weakened,  possibly  by  retouching.  Notice 
the  hands  of  the  men  below. 

81.  ^Master  of  Frankfort.  Altar-Piece  of  the  Cruci- 
fixion. A  triptych  of  considerable  archaeological  in- 
terest, as  the  note  in  the  catalogue  suggests.  As 
art  it  is  also  of  some  importance.  The  figures  are 
well  done,  keep  their  place  in  the  landscape,  have 
good  colour.  The  religious  feeling  is  genuine,  true 
in  every  way.  The  portraits  of  the  donors  at  the 
sides  are  a  little  chalky,  perhaps,  but  honest.  The 


114  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

landscape  at  the  back  is  excellent.     See  the  same 
master's  work  in  the  Berlin  Gallery  (No.  575). 

107.  Memling,  Hans.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  This  por- 
*  trait  is  thought  to  be  a  likeness  of  the  painter  him- 
self— at  least  that  is  the  tradition  that  accompanies 
it.  The  picture  was  originally  very  well  done,  and 
a  characteristic  portrait,  no  doubt,  but  now  it  has 
been  cleaned  and  retouched  until  even  the  red  cap 
seems  to  have  lost  its  purity  of  colour.  Notice 
the  grey  scumbles  rubbed  into  it,  as  also  into  the 
face  and  hands.  A  fine  picture  for  all  that,  with 
some  very  good  drawing  in  the  face  and  an  attrac- 
tive landscape  at  the  back. 

113.  MetSVS,  Quenthl.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  It  is 
done  with  much  largeness  of  vision  and  drawing. 
The  face  is  forcefully  given,  as  are  also  the  hands, 
the  hat,  the  cloak.  The  colour  is  sombre  and  dull, 
the  landscape  blue.  There  are  several  versions  of 
it.  It  does  not  look  much  like  the  work  of  Metsys, 
though  strong  enough  to  have  passed  at  one  time 
for  a  Holbein.  It  is  now  thought  by  some  critics 
to  have  been  done  by  a  painter  in  the  Bles  group. 
A  fine  portrait  in  any  event. 

44.  MorettO  da  Brescia.  Madonna  Enthroned  with 
*  St.  Anthony  Abbott  and  St.  Sebastian.  An  altar- 
piece  that  (with  No.  45  in  this  gallery)  would  look 
better  in  a  church  chapel,  where  the  architecture 
of  the  chapel  might  supplement  that  of  the  picture. 
Here,  framed  up  in  a  gallery,  it  appears  empty  and 
meaningless,  with  too  few  figures  and  too  much 
architecture  in  evidence.  It  has,  nevertheless,  good 
colour  and  light,  and  Moretto's  silvery  tone  is  ap- 
parent in  it.  The  Angel  below  playing  the  lute  is 
childlike,  the  green  cloth  at  the  back  of  the  Child, 


NEER,  AART  VAN  DER  115 

the  blue  drapery  of  the  Madonna,  the  banner  are 
all  well  enough  done.  The  picture  is  not  one  of 
Moretto's  great  ones,  however.  It  has  been  hurt 
by  repainting. 

45.    Madonna     Enthroned     with      Four     Church 

Fathers.  It  is  a  large  and  important  Moretto — 
the  catalogue  intimates  the  most  important  north 
of  the  Alps,  which  is  putting  it  positively  when  one 
thinks  of  the  fine  St.  Justina  at  Vienna.  It  has 
Moretto's  silvery  tone,  and  is  in  colour  and  com- 
position a  handsome  altar-piece;  but  one  fails  in 
seeing  much  inspiration  in  it,  or  getting  much  in- 
spiration out  of  it.  It  is  a  little  prosaic  for  all  its 
fine  drawing  of  the  Cardinal  in  red  with  the  good 
shadows,  or  the  painting  of  the  kneeling  Pope  op- 
posite in  his  handsome  brocade.  The  side  figures 
serve  to  balance  the  group,  but  are  as  heavy  as 
the  Madonna  and  Child.  However,  the  total 
result  of  the  figures,  colours,  architecture,  sky, 
flowers  is  imposing  and  certainly  handsome.  Per- 
haps the  altar-piece  at  Berlin  (No.  197),  certainly 
the  St.  Justina  at  Vienna,  have  more  inspiring  fea- 
tures about  them  than  this,  but  all  three  works  are 
decorative  and  to  be  admired. 

47.  Moroni,  Giovanni  Battista.  Portrait  of  a 
Monk.  It  is  a  strong,  well-drawn  head  with  un- 
brushed  hair,  a  wrinkled  forehead,  and  rather  posi- 
tive, realistic  features.  It  may  be  by  Moroni,  but 
the  characteristics  of  that  master  are  not  too  ap- 
parent in  it.  In  a  monk's  white  robe.  Somewhat 
repainted. 

S55.    Neer,  Aart  van  der.    Landscape.    The  sky  is  a 

bit  weak  but  the  ground,  trees,  and  water  are  well 
done.  A  rather  unusual  Van  der  Neer. 


116  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

205.  Ostade,  Adriaen  van.  Interior  of  a  Peasant's 
Cottage.  A  fine  piece  of  colour.  What  a  mystery 
in  that  background,  so  thinly  laid  in  that  you  can 
feel  the  material  of  the  ground  in  the  colour!  This 
is  workmanship  of  a  very  good  kind  if  not  great 
art  in  a  matter  of  thinking.  See  also  No.  205s. 
They  are  both  excellent  panels. 

668.  Palma  Vecchio.  Resting  Nymphs.  This  is  a 
*  very  perplexing  picture  and  may  be  interpreted 
in  several  ways.  In  spirit  it  seems  too  modern  to 
be  ancient  and  yet  not  modern  enough  for  one  to 
be  sure  of  its  modernity.  The  conception  of  the 
two  figures  by  a  pond  or  river,  out-of-doors,  under 
a  rose-bush,  seems  foreign  to  the  old  Venetians, 
certainly  different  from  anything  we  know  of  theirs 
or  of  Palma  specifically — the  Giorgionesque  things 
being  in  a  somewhat  different  style  and  spirit. 
The  attempt  to  treat  the  figures  in  an  intimate, 
genre  manner,  as  a  part  of  the  landscape,  has  been 
awkwardly  met.  They  seem  much  too  large  for  the 
foliage  back  of  them.  They  dominate  the  whole 
picture  and  make  the  landscape  and  water  mere 
accessories.  In  other  words,  the  picture  is  one  of 
figures  with  a  landscape  rather  than  a  landscape 
with  figures.  The  arch  of  the  figures — a  very 
beautiful  arch  and  peculiarly  Palmesque — is  re- 
peated in  the  hill  and  foliage  at  the  back  and  the 
shore  and  water  lines  repeat  the  base  of  the  arch. 
The  figures  themselves  are  again  Palmesque,  well 
drawn,  graceful,  reminding  one  forcefully  of  the 
brown-skinned  beauties  in  the  Giorgione  of  the 
Louvre  (No.  1136).  The  woman  at  the  right  is, 
in  pose,  arm,  and  leg,  very  like  the  seated  figure  in 
the  Louvre  picture,  and  the  figure  at  the  left,  in  the 
thighs,  torso,  and  arm,  corresponds  again  to  the 


PARMIGIANINO  117 

standing  figure  in  the  same  picture.  They  are  well 
rounded  by  shadow  and  are  beautiful  in  contours 
as  in  colour.  Of  course,  they  make  a  spot  of  high 
light  in  the  picture.  Unfortunately,  they  are  some- 
what repainted,  as  one  may  see  in  the  hair,  or  the 
shadows,  or  the  hands. 

The  very  modern-looking  shore  or  bank  is  put 
in  with  leaves  and  flowers,  some  of  them  shown  in 
reflection  in  the  water;  but  there  is  no  reflection  of 
the  women  in  the  water.  The  duck  is  absurd,  out 
of  place,  and  it,  too,  has  no  reflection.  The  land- 
scape at  left  and  right  is  the  most  believable  por- 
tion of  the  picture.  It  is  an  odd  amalgam,  this 
picture.  See  the  article  upon  it  in  the  Burlington 
Magazine,  vol.  10,  p.  315,  by  Sir  Claude  Phillips. 
See  also  in  these  guides  the  note  on  the  Louvre 
Giorgione  (No.  1136). 

692.   Palmezzano,    Marco.     John  the    Baptist.    An 

altar  wing  with  the  single  figure  of  the  saint  given 
with  considerable  relief  and  very  good  action.  The 
figure  stands  well,  is  well  drawn,  and  well  related 
to  its  background.  The  blue  sky  is  luminous. 

42.  Parmigianino  (Francesco  Mazzola).  Portrait 
of  a  Lady.  At  first  the  portrait  is  a  little  chilling 
in  its  cool  greens  which  the  spot  of  red  in  the  chair 
does  not  temper  nor  the  flesh-notes  materially  af- 
fect. It  is  somewhat  pretentious  but  not  disa- 
greeably so.  There  is  style  about  it  for  all  its  hint 
of  the  coming  Decadence  in  its  round  lines  and 
pretty  hands.  The  drawing  is  good  and  there  is 
a  pleasant  landscape  seen  through  the  window. 
The  lady  is  patrician  in  type  and  perhaps  is  con- 
scious of  her  beauty.  The  picture  has  been  much 
attributed.  See  the  catalogue  note. 


118  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

16.    Perugino,     Pietro.     Madonna,    Child,    and    St. 

*  John.  It  is  evidently  a  picture  done  in  Perugino's 
mature  period.  The  feeling  is  really  profound,  the 
sentiment  of  the  Madonna  very  apparent,  the  ten- 
derness of  the  children  more  than  obvious.  The 
workmanship  is  good  in  the  hair,  head-dress,  and 
shadow  about  the  Madonna's  head,  though  the 
oval  of  the  face  and  the  line  of  the  neck  are  sharply 
given.  The  children's  heads  are  also  cut  clean  and 
round  against  their  background.  The  colour  is 
deep,  especially  in  the  upper  sky,  and  there  is  a 
light  horizon  with  a  feeling  of  dawn.  Somewhat 
injured. 

N.  N.  Piero  di  Cosimo  (?).  Holy  Family.  Evidently 
a  recent  acquisition  and  not  a  very  valuable  one. 
It  is  hardly  by  Piero  or  any  other  master  of  rank. 
The  drawing  is  hard  (look  at  the  Joseph)  and  the 
work  generally  rather  crude.  Moreover,  the  pic- 
ture has  been  badly  rubbed  and  repainted.  The 
colour  is  good  and  the  feeling  is  right. 
14A.  Pontormo  (Jacopo  Carucci).  Portrait  of  a 
Lady.  In  a  bright  red  dress  with  a  dog  held  in  the 
lap.  The  figure  is  weak  in  the  proportions  of  the 
arms  and  hands,  rather  unreal  in  its  seating,  a  little 
harsh  in  drawing,  and  somewhat  crude  in  colour. 
It  has  a  smooth  surface  and  something  of  Andrea 
del  Sarto's  influence  is  apparent  in  it. 

75 1  Ratgeb,   Jerg.     Portraits  of  Claus  Stalberg  and 
76  /  Wife.    These  are  two  full-length  portraits  noticea- 
ble more,  perhaps,  for  their  decorative  quality  in 
the  figures  and  their  backgrounds  than  anything 
else.     They  are  fine  works  in  that  respect. 

642.    Rembrandt  van  Rijn.     The  Triumph  of  Delilah. 

The   picture   is   signed    and   dated    1636 — which 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RUN  119 

proves  nothing  at  all.  In  spite  of  signature  and 
date,  one  may  venture  to  think  that  a  painter  who 
did  the  Anatomy  Lesson  in  1632  and  the  Coppenol 
and  Saskia  at  Cassel  about  1633  did  not  do  this 
coarse,  brutal  picture  in  1636  or  at  any  other  time. 
It  is  not  the  theme  that  is  referred  to  as  coarse  or 
brutal  but  the  drawing  and  the  brush-work  of  it, 
the  light-and-shadow  of  it,  the  colour  of  it.  Look 
at  the  flat  black  profile  of  the  man  with  the  hal- 
berd, his  dreadful  eye,  nose,  and  mouth,  his  flat 
figure,  his  lumpy  left  hand,  and  the  clumsily  drawn 
halberd  head.  Look  at  the  exposed  breast  of  Sam- 
son and  think  of  it  in  connection  with  the  dead 
figure  in  the  Anatomy  Lesson.  Look  at  the  man 
in  armour  driving  the  dagger  into  Samson's  eye — 
the  drawing  of  the  head,  the  arm  in  armour,  and 
the  mailed  head  in  relation  to  the  body.  Look 
at  the  scarecrow  warrior  coming  in  at  the  extreme 
right  with  open  mouth  and  round  eyes.  Look  at 
the  curtains,  the  cave,  or  whatever  it  represents, 
with  the  theatrical  Delilah,  in  baby-blue  surround- 
ings, taking  a  flight  into  space.  You  have  heard, 
time  out  of  mind,  that  Rembrandt  was  the  master 
of  light-and-shade  and  that  he  painted  the  most 
luminous  of  shadows;  but  where  are  they  here? 
You  have  also  heard  that  he  surrounded  his  figures 
by  atmosphere,  set  them  in  an  envelope  of  air;  but 
where  is  it  here?  Again,  Rembrandt  has  been  de- 
clared a  great  colourist  more  than  once,  but  there 
is  no  intimation  of  it  here.  Besides,  in  his  grey 
period  he  was  almost  a  perfect  brushman.  Go  close 
and  look  at  the  handling  here.  It  is  crude,  coarse, 
unskilled,  without  a  particle  of  subtlety  in  it.  Fi- 
nally look  at  the  picture  as  a  whole  and  ask  yourself 
where  in  Rembrandt's  celebrated  works  its  like- 


120  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

ness  in  technique  is  paralleled  or  even  suggested. 
The  painter  of  the  Anatomy  Lesson,  the  Night 
Watch,  the  Syndics,  the  Manoah,  the  Sobieski 
(St.  Petersburg),  the  Cassel  Saskia,  and  Coppenol, 
never  did  this  work.  It  is  something  done  by  a 
follower  and  an  imitator.  The  picture  has  been 
pieced  out  at  the  top. 

183.   David    before    Saul.     This  is  no  more  of  a 

Rembrandt  than  No.  642,  though  there  is  no  coarse- 
ness or  brutality  about  it.  On  the  contrary,  it  is 
the  exact  opposite  of  No.  642  and  is  all  sweetness — a 
quality  just  as  foreign  to  Rembrandt  as  coarseness. 
No  painter  in  art  history  ever  turned  such  artistic 
somersaults  as  this.  This  prettified  work  belongs 
Somewhere  near  such  pupils  as  Koninck  or  Poor- 
ter.  The  same  hand  that  did  this  probably  did 
the  Minerva  at  Berlin  (No.  828c),  there  assigned 
to  Rembrandt  but  in  reality  by  a  pupil  or  follower 
of  much  less  force.  The  theme  is  the  same  as  in 
a  larger  picture  at  The  Hague,  assigned  to  Rem- 
brandt, but  again  the  pictures  are  totally  different 
in  style  and  workmanship.  That  at  The  Hague 
was  probably  done  by  Flinck  and  this  at  Frankfort 
by  even  a  prettier  painter  than  Flinck.  Notice 
the  badly  drawn  hands  and  harp  of  David,  the 
questionable  figure  of  Saul,  the  bleached  light,  the 
diaphanous  background.  It  will  not  do  as  a  Rem- 
brandt. 

182.    Portrait   of   Margareta    van    Bilderbeecq.      It 

is  an  honest  Dutch  picture  of  good  quality  that  is 
not  convincingly  Rembrandt's  though  possibly  by 
him.  The  ruff  comes  the  nearest  to  him.  The 
askew  head-dress  and  the  face  are  less  Rembrandt- 
esque  though  the  latter  is  quite  right  in  its  paint- 


ROSSO,  IL  121 

ing.  The  reddish-coloured  flesh,  the  drawing  of 
the  eyes,  the  handling  of  the  high  lights  on  the 
nose  and  forehead,  the  painting  of  the  hair  are  all 
somewhat  different  from  what  we  know  of  Rem- 
brandt's workmanship.  Certainly  it  is  not  what 
one  would  call  a  characteristic  early  Rembrandt, 
such,  for  instance,  as  the  Burggraeff  portrait  at 
Dresden  (No.  1557).  Yet  this  Frankfort  picture 
is  declared  to  be  the  companion  piece  of  the  Dres- 
den picture.  It  seems  as  though  there  must  be 
some  mistake  in  associating  them  as  companion 
pictures. 

181.  Rembrandt,  School  of.  The  Parable  of  the 
Workers  in  the  Vineyard.  This  picture  is  rightly 
enough,  perhaps,  put  down  to  the  Rembrandt 
School.  It  was  possibly  painted  by  the  same 
hand  that  did  the  Christ  before  Pilate  at  Budapest 
(No.  368)  and  is  not  unlike  the  Cornelius  the  Cen- 
turion in  the  Wallace  Collection  (No.  86).  The 
manners  of  doing  the  noses,  the  hands,  the  head- 
dresses are  similar.  This  picture  is,  however,  darker 
and  duller  in  colour  than  the  Wallace  Collection 
picture  and  differs  in  other  respects.  The  same 
hand  that  did  the  Parable  possibly  did  the  Saul 
and  David  at  The  Hague  (No.  621)  and  the  Young 
Man  at  Munich  (No.  345),  all  of  them  given  to 
Rembrandt  or  his  school,  but  none  of  them  by  him. 
They  are  nearer  to  what,  for  the  present,  we  must 
call  Flinck,  at  least  until  Flinck's  artistic  person- 
ality is  definitely  established. 

14.  Rosso,  II  (Giovanni  Battista  di  Jacopo).  Ma- 
donna, Child,  and  St.  John.  Both  the  Madonna 
and  St.  John  are  reminiscent  of  Andrea  del  Sarto 
in  types  and  drawing,  though  the  flesh  is  hotter, 


122  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

the  colour  brighter,  and  the  drawing  less  accurate 
than  with  Andrea.  Also  the  little  affectation  of 
tying  up  the  green  curtain  at  the  back  is  Rosso's 
own,  not  Andrea's.  It  makes  a  good  panel  of  col- 
our but  in  spirit  it  is  just  as  earthy  as  anything 
Andrea  ever  painted. 

683.  Rubens,  Peter  Paul.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  This 
was  probably  a  sketchy  portrait  originally  and 
has  now  been  rubbed  flat  in  the  face  so  that  much 
of  the  modelling  is  destroyed.  The  fur  of  the  coat 
and  the  ruff  were  perhaps  never  carried  any  further 
than  their  present  state.  The  portrait  still  has 
character  and  force  about  it.  Look  at  the  black 
hat — how  well  it  fits  down  on  the  head!  What 
exact  value  it  has !  The  head  fits  into  the  ruff  and 
the  ruff  travels  around  the  neck.  And  what  well- 
drawn  forehead  and  eyes !  The  picture  is  well  made 
— well  put  together. 

127.   King  David.     A  work  of  Rubens's  own  hand 

*  and  still  showing  his  brush-work  all  through  it. 
Stand  in  the  middle  of  the  room  and  see,  first,  the 
depth  through  of  the  figure  and  the  relation  of  the 
hands  to  one  another.  Nothing  could  be  truer  or 
finer.  See,  in  the  second  place,  how  the  head  joins 
the  trunk  of  the  body — in  the  precise  middle,  as 
it  should.  In  the  third  place,  see  the  depth  through 
of  that  head.  What  drawing  it  has!  There  are 
foolish  people  these  days  to  tell  you  that  Rubens 
had  no  bone  or  muscle  in  his  figures,  that  they  are 
jelly-like,  poured  into  a  mould,  and  all  that.  But 
look  at  this  head  and  see  if  it  has  not  bone  struc- 
ture under  it  as  well  as  real  hair  over  it.  Notice 
how  the  forehead,  ear,  nose,  beard  are  done.  And, 
finally,  what  a  piece  of  colour  it  is!  From  a  mere 


TIEPOLO,  GIOVANNI  BATTISTA  123 

technical  point  of  view  the  picture  is  beautiful. 
And  nothing  has  been  said  about  the  fine  character 
of  the  old  man  and  the  king.  The  picture  is  prob- 
ably a  finished  study  for  some  larger  work. 

272A.  Ruisdael,  Jacob  van.  Waterfall.  This  is  one 
of  Ruisdael's  slate-coloured  landscapes  with  an  or- 
namental play  of  water  in  the  foreground  that  is 
truer  to  ornament  than  to  nature.  The  sky  is 
very  dark  and  all  nature  seems  to  be  in  a  tremble. 
There  is  no  serenity  or  repose  about  it. 

216A.  Steen,  Jan.  Leyden  Fish-Market.  An  unusual 
Steen  in  the  smallness  of  the  figures,  but,  taken  as 
a  whole,  it  holds  together  well  and  has  light,  colour, 
and  air.  No.  214  is  hardly  by  Steen  at  all. 

153.    Teniers  the  Younger,  David.     The  Smoker.    A 

number  of  Teniers  of  similar  quality  to  this  are 
in  this  gallery.  In  a  gayer  mood  and  with  poorer 
results  pictorially  are  Nos.  157c  and  152. 

204.  Terborch,  Gerard.  The  Class  of  Wine.  A  pic- 
ture of  some  charm  in  colour  and  in  painting.  It 
is  simply  composed  and  very  well  handled,  as  you 
may  see  by  the  white  jug,  or  the  grey  dress,  or  the 
writing  materials.  The  face,  hands,  and  back- 
ground have  been  injured  by  cleaning  and  retouch- 
ing. Several  other  versions  in  the  European  gal- 
leries. See  the  catalogue  note  upon  this  one. 

50.  Tiepolo,  Giovanni  Battista.  The  Continence  of 
Scipio.  The  colour  of  it  is  a  little  warm  but  very 
effective — in  fact,  quite  charming.  The  picture  is 
handled  with  much  spirit  and  painter's  verve  and 
drawn  with  that  energy  that  Tiepolo  was  capable 
of  on  occasion.  It  is  enough  better  than  the  larger 
picture,  No.  690,  which  is  so  wanting  in  any  fine 


124  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

sense  of  colour  that  it  appears  tawdry  beside  the 
smaller  example. 

652.   Head  of  a  Man.     An  excellent  head,   very 

cleverly  brushed  in,  possibly  by  the  hand  of  Do- 
menico  Tiepolo  rather  than  by  his  father,  Giovanni 
Battista  Tiepolo.  There  seems  little  or  no  distinc- 
tion between  father  and  son  in  the  Tiepolo  attri- 
butions made  in  the  different  galleries  of  Europe. 
This  picture  shows  a  more  flowing  and  less  flaky 
handling  of  pigment,  more  facility  and  less  accuracy 
than  were  peculiar  to  Giovanni.  Besides,  the  sub- 
ject and  type  were  ones  that  pleased  Domenico. 
He  did  a  number  of  these  portraits  of  Oriental- 
looking  people  that  have  been  given  to  his  father. 
The  handling  of  the  buckle  at  the  belt  is  something 
that  of  itself  speaks  the  younger  man. 

43A.  Titian  (Tiziano  Vecellio).  Portrait  of  a  Young 
Man.  It  is  a  well-drawn  and  well-painted  head 
with  some  fine  feeling  about  it  and  a  good  deal  of 
warm  colouring.  The  style  of  it  resembles  some- 
what the  early  work  of  Titian  but  it  has  not  his 
accuracy  in  the  drawing  and  the  handling.  The 
eye,  the  nose,  and  the  face  line  are  hardly  his. 
Somewhat  over-cleaned. 

68.  Velasquez,  Diego  de  Silva  y.  Portrait  of  the 
Infanta  Margarita  Teresa.  This  is  another  ver- 
sion of  a  portrait  seen  in  several  of  the  European 
galleries,  Vienna,  for  example  (No.  619).  It  ap- 
pears to  be  a  school  piece  which  possibly  Velasquez 
had  under  supervision.  The  dress,  the  room,  the 
curtain,  the  chair,  the  rug  are  fairly  well  done. 
The  hair  is  a  little  coarse  for  Velasquez,  and  the 
red  bows,  the  slashings  of  the  sleeves,  the  face, 
the  neck  are  not  sure  enough  for  him.  But  it  is 


VERMEER  125 

a  good  school  work.  Beruete,  however,  thinks  it 
is  a  genuine  Velasquez. 

57.    Portrait   of   Cardinal  Borja.     There   is   small 

reason  to  suppose  that  Velasquez  ever  saw  this 
picture.  It  is  not  at  all  in  his  style  and  appar- 
ently not  even  of  his  school.  It  is  sparely  but  not 
badly  done — the  drawing  being  simple,  direct, 
harsh,  quite  untutored,  lacking  in  finesse  and  sensi- 
tiveness. The  hair  and  beard  are  strangely  hard 
and  inadequate  in  texture.  The  colour  is  rather 
good.  It  seems  a  little  earlier  than  the  time  of 
Velasquez. 

284A.  Velde,  Willem  van  de.  Calm  Sea.  The  theme 
is  hackneyed  in  Van  de  Velde's  hands,  but  this  is 
certainly  a  good  example  of  it.  The  effect  is  much 
better  than  usual. 

49A.  Venetian  School.  Head  of  a  Man.  The  head 
has  evidently  been  cut  out  of  a  larger  picture, 
where  the  character  may  have  figured  as  a  donor 
or  in  some  similar  capacity.  It  has  what  has  been 
vaguely  called  "a  Giorgionesque  look."  The 
mouth  and  nose  are  well  drawn. 

217A.  Vermeer  (Van  der  Meer)  of  Delft,  Jan.  The 
Astronomer.  Here  is  the  painter  whom  we  have 
called  the  pseudo-Vermeer  to  distinguish  him  from 
the  accepted  Vermeer.  He  has  pictures  at  Amster- 
dam (No.  2528),  at  The  Hague  (No.  625),  at  the 
London  National  Gallery  (Nos.  1383,  2568),  and 
elsewhere.  There  is  no  quality  to  his  colour,  his 
high  lights  are  spotty,  his  drawing  is  hard,  his  inte- 
riors airless,  his  dotting  (as  in  the  cloth  here)  is 
crumby  and  often  (as  at  Amsterdam)  over-done. 
He  is  as  cheap  an  imitator  of  Vermeer  as  Janssens  is 
of  Pieter  de  Hooch.  And  it  is  some  Janssens,  some 


126  THE  STAEDEL  INSTITUTE 

Netscher  or  Hoogstraten  grown  hard  and  man- 
nered in  treatment,  who  produced  these  pictures. 
There  is,  of  course,  a  possibility  that  it  is  Vermeer 
himself  in  decay,  but  that  is  hardly  a  probability. 
How  poor  this  alleged  Vermeer  is  in  light,  in  the 
drawing  of  the  hands,  the  sleeves,  the  head,  the 
window,  the  wall,  the  picture  hanging  on  the  wall, 
the  chair!  Think  of  it  being  done  by  the  painter 
of  the  exquisite  Lady  with  the  Pearls  at  Berlin 
(No.  912s),  or  the  Girl  at  the  Window  at  Dresden 
(No.  1336),  or  the  Portrait  at  Budapest  (No.  456), 
or  again  at  Brussels  (No.  665)!  Lest  you  should 
have  doubts  about  its  being  a  Vermeer,  it  is  signed 
twice — a  forged  signature  on  the  wall,  and  another, 
half  obliterated,  on  the  panel  of  the  cupboard. 

9.    VertOCChio,    School    of.     Madonna   and    Child. 

The  painter  of  several  pictures  superficially  of  this 
character  (at  Berlin  and  London)  seems  no  nearer 
detection  now  than  twenty-five  years  ago.  Who 
did  them  is  still  a  question.  It  seems  likely^they 
are  the  work  of  some  Florentine  eclectic  who  was 
near  to  Verrocchio's  workshop,  knew  the  work  of 
the  Pollajuoli,  of  Lorenzo  di  Credi,  and  others. 
They  are  not  bad  pictures;  in  fact,  they  are  very 
good,  but  they  have  not  the  spirit  or  the  knowledge 
or  the  originality  of  a  great  master.  This,  for  in- 
stance, is  a  handsome  Madonna  and  Child,  with 
good  sentiment  and  colour,  but  is  lacking  in  great 
skill  or  care  or  tenderness  in  such  features  as  the 
Child's  hair,  the  Madonna's  head-dress,  the  robes, 
the  gold  borderings.  The  Berlin  and  London  ex- 
amples seem  better  done. 

131.    Vos,    Cornells    de.      Portrait   of  a    Child.     It   is 

smoothly  but  agreeably  painted,  with  a  good  deal 


WEYDEN,  ROGER  VAN  DER  127 

of  facility  of  handling  and  truth  of  drawing.  As 
a  characterisation  of  a  Dutch  child  it  is  decidedly 
effective.  At  one  time  thought  to  be  a  Rubens. 

100.  Weyden,  Roger  van  der.    Madonna,  Child,  and 
Saints.     This  is  a  picture  that  perhaps  shows  more 
skill  than  spirit.     Certain  small  details,  such  as  the 
vase  with  the  flowers,  the  glass,  the  book,  are  well 
done,  but  as  a  whole  the  work  is  not    inspired. 
The  white  throne,  the  canopy,  the  angels  are  out 
of  tone,  somewhat  after  the  manner  of  Roger's 
followers;    and  the  colour  is  a  little  tame.     The 
work  probably  belongs  somewhere  with  Roger's 
following.     Wauters  thinks  it  an  early  example, 
done  at  Louvain.     M.  Paul  Lafond  also  seems  to 
think  it  a  Roger.     The  gold  ground  has  been  re- 
painted. 

101.   Altar-Piece.   In  three  panels,  showing  the  Birth 

of  the  Baptist,  the  Baptism  of  Christ,  and  the  Be- 
heading of  the  Baptist.     It  is  a  smaller  version 
of  the  St.  John  Baptist  altar-piece  at  Berlin  (No. 
534fi),  and  the  question  which  is  the  original  and 
which  the  replica  is  a  mooted  one.     Perhaps  neither 
of  them  is  more  than  a  copy,  though  this  Frankfort 
example  seems  freer  in  the  doing  than  the  one  in 
Berlin.     It  is  an  interesting  picture  for  all  that  the 
architecture  is  out  of  tone,  though  it  is  not  so  much 
out  as  in  the  Berlin  picture.     The  colour  of  the 
robes,  the  figures,  the  picturesque  little  scenes,  such 
as  that  at  the  back  of  the  right  panel  or  the  bed- 
room scene  at  the  left,  are  all  well  done.     See  the 
note  on  the  Berlin  altar-piece  (No.  534s).    They 
are  both  probably  exact  old  copies. 


INDEX  OF  PICTURES  BY  NUMBERS 


5.   Girolamo  di  Benvenuto. 

571 

7.   Angelico,  Fra. 

58} 

9.   Verrocchio,  School  of. 

58A 

i  \  Botticelli. 

71. 

12  / 

73. 

13.   Bartolommeo     Venezi- 

751 

ano. 

76} 

14.   Rosso,  11. 

81. 

14A.  Pontormo. 

83 

15.   Fiorenzo  di  Lorenzo. 

85 

16.   Perugino. 

87 

18.   Bonsignori. 

88 

19.   Macrino  d'Alba. 

93. 

20.   Lombard  School. 

951 

21.   Caroto. 

96] 

22.   Garofalo. 

97. 

22A.  Correggio. 

98. 

^  1  Crivelli,  Carlo. 

O4  J 

99. 
100  1 

35.   Bellini,  Giovanni. 

101  / 

36.   Catena. 

102 

38.   Carpaccio. 

103 

39  1  p. 

104 

40  }  ^lma" 

105 

42.   Parmigianino. 

107. 

43A.  Titian. 

108. 

44l 
,-  >  Moretto  da  Brescia. 

108A. 
110. 

47.    Moroni. 

111. 

49  A.  Venetian  School. 

113. 

50.   Tiepolo,  G.  B. 

122c. 

Velasquez. 

Coello,  Claudio. 

Holbein. 

Baldung. 

Ratgeb. 

Master  of  Frankfort. 

Diirer. 

Cranach  the  Elder. 
Cleve,  Juste  van. 
Bruyn. 

Bouts. 

Eyck,  Jan  van. 

Christus. 

Weyden,  Roger  van  der. 

Master  of  Fl&nalle. 

Memling. 

David. 

Bouts. 

David. 

Goes,  van  der. 

Metsys,  Q. 

Brueghel  the  Elder,  Jan. 


129 


130 


INDEX 


127.   Rubens. 

131.   Vos,  C.  de. 

144A.  Dyck,  Anthony  van. 


153.   Tenders. 


181.   Rembrandt,  School  of. 
}|j}  Rembrandt. 

184.  Bol. 

188.  Eeckhout. 

193.  Gelder. 

197.  Fabritius,  B. 

204.  Terborch. 

205.  Ostade,  A.  van. 
216A.  Steen. 

217. 


217A.  Vermeer  of  Delft. 
242s.  Goyen,  Van. 
255.   Neer,  Van  der. 
272A.  Ruisdael,  J.  van. 
284A.  Velde,  W.  van  de. 
29lA.  Hobbema. 

307.  Cuyp,  Albert. 

308.  Cuyp,  J.  G. 
639.   Aertsen. 
642.   Rembrandt. 
652.   Tiepolo,  G.  B. 
655.   Cranach  the  Elder. 

658.  Bol. 

659.  Antwerp  School. 
668.   Palma  the  Elder. 
683.   Rubens. 

692.   Palmezzano. 
701.   Belotto. 
N.N.Piero  di  Cosimo. 


THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 


NOTE  ON  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

CASSEL  is  well  known  in  the  art  world.  Every  one 
goes  there  to  study  the  Rembrandts.  The  gallery  holds 
high  rank  because  of  them,  even  though  all  of  the 
twenty-one  examples  cannot  be  accepted  as  genuine. 
However,  the  perfect  early  portrait  of  Coppenol,  the 
brilliantly  hued  Saskia,  the  Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman 
of  later  date,  the  famous  landscape — to  mention  no 
more — are  there,  and  those  four  pictures  in  themselves 
are  worth  a  trip  from  Berlin,  Cologne,  or  Frankfort. 
Besides,  the  remaining  Rembrandts  are  very  good  pic- 
tures, notwithstanding  the  fact  that  some  of  them 
were  done  by  pupils  and  followers. 

And  Rembrandt  is  not  the  only  feature  of  the  gallery, 
as  the  student  finds  to  his  surprise,  when  he  walks 
through  the  rooms.  There  are  eleven  pictures  by  Ru- 
bens, twelve  by  Van  Dyck,  twelve  by  Jordaens,  seven 
by  Frans  Hals.  Some  of  these  are  excellent.  In  addi- 
tion there  is  a  perfect  little  masterpiece  by  Terborch, 
and  good  pictures  by  Steen,  Keyser,  Wouwerman, 
Moro,  Scorel.  There  are  several  fine  works  by  Cranach, 
Baldung,  Altdorfer,  and  others  of  the  German  School. 
Add  to  this  many  examples  of  the  Italians,  some  French 
and  Spanish  works,  and  you  have  a  collection  of  no 
mean  proportions. 

133 


134         NOTE  ON  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

The  bulk  of  these  pictures,  or  at  least  the  best  of 
them,  came  to  the  gallery  in  its  early  days.  In  the  eight- 
eenth century  the  Landgrave  William  VIII  was  in  Hol- 
land as  governor  of  Breda  and  Maastricht,  and  at  that 
time  began  the  collection  of  Dutch  pictures.  He  pur- 
chased in  one  lot  sixty-four  pictures,  including  eight 
Rembrandts,  for  the  now  trifling  sum  of  forty  thousand 
guilders.  These  with  the  purchases  made  after  his  re- 
turn to  Germany  were  the  real  beginnings  of  the  present 
gallery,  though  the  Landgrave's  predecessors  had  col- 
lections of  pictures,  chiefly  portraits,  before  his  time. 
In  1806  some  of  the  pictures  that  had  been  boxed  for 
safety,  because  of  the  presence  of  the  French,  came  into 
possession  of  the  Empress  Josephine  and,  in  1815,  were 
sold  to  the  Emperor  Alexander  of  Russia.  They  are 
now  in  the  Hermitage.  These  were  not,  however,  the 
most  valuable  pictures  in  the  collection,  and  the  gallery 
has  long  since  outgrown  their  loss.  Many  additions 
have  been  made  since  then,  and  to-day  the  catalogue 
of  the  gallery  lists  nearly  a  thousand  numbers. 

The  new  catalogue  of  1913  (in  German)  has  some 
critical  notes  of  value  and  also  some  good  illustrations. 
It  is  arranged  alphabetically,  according  to  the  painters' 
names,  and  answers  very  well  as  a  finding  list.  The 
elaborate  catalogue  published  some  years  ago  is  now 
out  of  print.  The  gallery  is  spacious  and  in  the  main 
well  lighted.  The  larger  and  more  celebrated  pictures 
are  well  placed  in  the  central  galleries,  while  the  smaller 
pictures  are  to  be  found  in  the  side  cabinets.  Ad- 


NOTE  ON  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY         135 

mission  to  the  gallery  during  the  day  hours  is  usually 
obtainable  by  ringing  the  bell  and  inquiring  for  the 
sacristan.  Photographs  are  to  be  had  in  the  town. 
Hanstaengl  has  a  book  of  cheap  reproductions  of  the 
pictures. 


THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

10A.    Altdorfer,    Albrecht.     Christ    on    the    Cross. 

*  Grim  and  grisly  in  its  realism — the  blood  being  too 
disagreeable  for  aesthetic  pleasure  but  possibly  not 
for  religion  in  Altdorfer's  day.  The  picture,  in 
spite  of  its  angular,  ill-drawn  figures  and  its  want 
of  just  proportions,  is  tragic  and  compelling.  The 
sky  is  sketchy  and  the  background  is  only  slightly 
indicated,  but  there  is  strength  in  it,  as  in  the  fig- 
ures and  the  sombre  colour.  The  picture  is,  per- 
haps, not  by  Altdorfer  but  nearer  to  the  painter  of 
No.  1451A-E  at  Munich,  there  ascribed  to  Burgk- 
mair. 

833.  Amberger,  Christoph.  St.  Augustine.  Done 
with  good  robes  and  good  colour.  The  drawing 
in  the  face  is  a  little  hard,  perhaps,  but,  then,  one 
expects  no  less  from  these  early  men.  The  wonder 
is  that  they  had  so  true  and  yet  so  picturesque  a 
point  of  view,  and  that  they  were  such  excellent 
workmen.  A  little  hurt  in  the  background. 

32.  Apt,  Ulrich.  Transfiguration.  With  fine  colour 
effect  in  costume,  landscape,  and  sky.  The  drap- 
ery is  angular  and  the  figures  somewhat  awkward 
but  they  are  honestly  conceived  and  painted. 
Notice  the  donor  and  the  coat  of  arms.  Formerly 
attributed  to  Scorel. 

484.    Bacchiacca  (Francesco  Ubertini).    Portrait  of 
an  Old  Man.     Somewhat  in  the  style  of  Francia- 
137 


138  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

bigio  but  with  Bacchiacca's  colouring  and  with  his 
questionable  drawing.  The  picture  is  dark,  som- 
bre, and  more  impressive  at  first  blush  than  on 
closer  acquaintance. 

7.  Baldung,  Hans.  Hercules  and  Anteus.  A  good 
*  piece  of  drawing,  with  insistence  upon  the  muscu- 
lar strain  of  the  action.  Baldung's  most  attrac- 
tive works  are  at  Munich,  Nuremberg,  and  Basle, 
where  he  is  more  graceful  in  line  and  less  violent 
in  pose.  But  here  is  strong  drawing — the  drawing 
of  a  northern  Pollajuolo. 

482.  Bartolommeo  di  Giovanni.  Christ  on  the 
Cross.  A  large  picture  in  the  style  of  no  painter 
in  particular.  It  is  prosaic  and  formal  in  both 
form  and  colour.  Probably  by  some  Florentine 
eclectic  of  neither  great  imagination  nor  skill. 
Mr.  Berenson  thinks  it  by  Granacci.  Formerly 
ascribed  to  Raffaellino  del  Garbo. 

41.    Beuckelaer,    Joachim.     The    Market    Woman. 

It  is  a  good  study  of  still-life  but  not  up  to  Beucke- 
laer's  pictures  at  Brussels.  The  figure  here  is  lost 
in  the  wilderness  of  vegetables.  Formerly  attrib- 
uted to  Aertsen. 

256.    Brouwer,    Cornells.     The    Unfaithful    Servant. 

Good  as  an  effect  of  light,  shadow,  and  air  in  an 
interior.  The  inset  of  the  figures — their  placing 
in  atmosphere — is  well  given  and  the  picture  is  not 
bad  in  colour.  As  to  whether  Cornelis  Brouwer 
painted  it  or  not,  who  knows?  It  is  said  to  be  his 
only  known  work. 

54.   Brueghel,  the  Elder  Jan  (Velvet).    A  Village 
Street.    Not  a  Brueghel  of  the  finest  quality  but 


CORNELISZ  VAN  OOSTSANEN  139 

it  is  picturesque  and  attractive  in  colour.  Notice 
the  costumes  in  the  group  at  the  right.  See  also 
No.  55. 

20  1  Cleve,  Juste  van  der  Beke  van  (Master  of  the 

21  /  Death  of  the  Virgin).      Portraits  of  a  Man  and 

Woman.  Companion  pieces,  large  in  scale,  per- 
haps a  little  over  life-size.  The  sleeves  of  the 
woman,  with  the  hands  and  head,  make  too  loud  a 
note,  perhaps,  but  the  portrait  is  well  done.  Both 
pictures  represent  dominant  personalities.  Both 
of  them  a  little  over-cleaned.  Formerly  ascribed 
to  Barthel  Bruyn. 

26.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  A  rather  strong,  self-re- 
liant sitter,  and  given  by  the  painter  with  sincerity 
and  honesty.  It  is  a  little  flat  in  technique — that 
is,  not  up  to  Diirer,  but  comparable,  perhaps,  to 
Cranach.  The  attribution  is  questionable.  See 
the  Munich  note  under  Cleve. 

151.  Coques,  Gonzales.  The  Young  Scholar  and  His 
Sister.  Fairly  well  drawn  and  painted  though  a 
little  thin.  It  is  too  ornate  in  colour  and  too  fine 
in  detail  for  the  best  results.  The  picture  is  also 
divided  in  composition  by  the  two  figures  and  the 
doorway.  The  painter  was  influenced  by  Van 
Dyck  and  possibly  by  Terborch. 

29.  Cornelisz  van  Oostsanen  (or  Van  Amsterdam), 
Jacob.  Christ  in  the  Garden.  The  whitish  sur- 
face of  the  picture  is  probably  produced  by  the  use 
of  too  much  white  in  the  high  lights.  There  is 
harsh  drawing,  but  the  detail  in  the  robes  is  fine 
and  the  colour  is  excellent.  The  religious  feeling 
is  very  strong.  Notice  the  trees  in  the  landscape. 
It  is  an  interesting  picture,  but  it  bears  but  a  super- 
ficial likeness  to  the  Salome  (No.  1)  at  The  Hague 


140  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

and  little  or  no  likeness  to  the  Berlin  picture  (No. 
607).  See  also  No.  30  in  this  gallery. 
112.  Gossiers,  Jan.  The  Nativity.  It  has  some  spir- 
ited action  about  it  and  some  good  painting, 
though  there  is  affectation  in  the  face  and  hands 
of  the  Madonna.  Neither  the  drawing  nor  the  col- 
ouring is  wonderful,  but  they  are  sufficient.  The 
Rubens  followers,  such  as  dossiers,  were  not  all 
mere  journeymen  painters.  Notice,  for  instance, 
the  good  colour  in  No.  94,  put  down  to  the  Rubens 
workshop.  The  attribution  of  No.  112  is  open  to 
question. 

14.  Cranach  the  Elder,  Lucas.     Lucretia.    The  flesh 
is  a  little  brown  but  otherwise  the  picture  is  good 
in  colour  and  drawing.     It  has  a  delightful  little 
landscape. 

13.    St.  Barbara.     The  red  of  the  robe  and  the 

brocade  hardly  seem  to  comport  with  the  piteous 
bowed  figure  of  the  saint  who  is  only  a  German 
peasant  girl.  But  it  is  an  effective  type.  The 
work  is  none  too  well  done.  Notice  the  poor  draw- 
ing of  the  hands  and  of  the  cup,  also  the  boyish 
doing  of  the  halo.  No.  12  was  probably  done  by 
the  same  painter.  The  attribution  to  Cranach  is 
questionable.  It  is  probably  a  school  piece. 

15.    Portrait  of  a  Man.     Very  decisively  drawn  in 

the  hat,  head,  face,  and  beard.     It  is  a  very  good 
portrait  and  in  Cranach's  best  style  of  portraiture. 
This  and  No.  16  are  declared  to  be  studio  pieces 
by  the  ultra-critical. 

19.  Cranach  the  Younger,  Lucas.  Nymph.  No- 
tice the  pretty  if  fantastic  landscape  at  the  back. 
The  figure  is  slight  and  pretty  even  for  the  younger 
Cranach. 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  141 

263.  Cuyp,  Benjamin  Gerritz.  5*.  Peter  Released 
from  Prison.  It  is  rather  absurd — almost  ludicrous 
— in  the  conception  but  a  very  good  piece  of  colour 
and  painting.  Notice  the  figure  in  green  for  the 
manner  of  its  doing. 

257  1  Dou,  Gerard.     Portraits.     Said  to  be  portraits  of 

258  /  Rembrandt's  father  and  mother.     In  Dou's  smooth 

style,  following  Rembrandt,  but  with  a  whole  world 
of  difference  between  him  and  his  master. 

6.    Durer,  Albrecht.     Portrait  of  Elizabeth  Tucker. 

Interesting  in  the  type  and  the  revelation  of  Teu- 
tonic character,  but  the  drawing  and  painting  are 
spiritless.  The  picture  is  probably  a  copy  or  a 
cheap  modern  composition  after  Durer.  At  any 
rate,  it  gives  no  indication  of  Diirer's  drawing  or 
method  of  work.  Look  at  the  bad  landscape.  Or- 
dinarily this  would  pass  as  a  "fake"  Durer. 

124.  Dyck,  Anthony  van.  Double  Portrait  of  Man 
and  Wife.  It  has  been  repainted  in  the  face  of 
the  woman  and  the  hands.  A  somewhat  dull 
composition  that  may  have  emanated  from  Van 
Dyck  but  has  not  any  very  pronounced  quality 
of  his.  The  curtain  at  the  back  is  disturbing  and 
the  placing  of  the  figures  on  the  canvas  is  wanting 
in  good  arrangement.  The  colour  is  mediocre. 

123.    Sebastian  Leerse  with   Wife  and  Child.     The 

faces  are  very  good,  especially  the  woman's,  with 
the  fine  eyes  and  rather  sharp-cut  nose.  The  boy 
in  green  at  the  side  is  also  well  done  in  the  head. 
The  picture  wants  a  little  in  balance.  The  man 
is  ample  in  body  but  fails  to  balance  the  woman 
and  boy.  It  has  been  cleaned  and  rubbed  too  much. 
The  columns  in  the  background  mean  nothing. 


142  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

See  also  the  Van  Dyck,  No.  839,  in  the  Munich 
Gallery. 

121.    Portrait  of  an  Italian  Nobleman.     Somewhat 

*  hurt  in  the  flesh-notes  of  the  face,  in  the  modelling 
of  the  hands,  and  in  the  dress,  but  still  an  imposing 
portrait  done  with  good  effect  in  costume,  column, 
and  curtain.     The  brown-red  of  the  dress  is  un- 
usual.    There  is  a  decidedly  swagger  air  about  it. 

126.    Portrait  of  Justus  van  Meerstraeten.     A  fine 

*  Van  Dyck,  large  in  the  figure  and  in  the  painter's 
method  of  recording  it.     Both  the  composition  and 
the  treatment  are  broad.     Notice  the  ample  folds 
of  the  dress,  the  large  hands,  head,  and  general 
bulk.     With  well-drawn  mouth,   moustache,   and 
eyes.     And  what  a  forehead  and  hair!     A  portrait 
of  a  manly  man,  done  after  the  Van  Dyck  formula, 
but  with  much  skill. 

127.    Portrait  of  Isabella  van  Assche.     A  slight  and 

very  flat  figure  in  an  ample  robe.     The  outline  of 
the  figure  is  sharply  drawn  and  the  eyes,  nose, 
and  mouth  are  a  little  curious  for  Van  Dyck;   but 
possibly  he  did  them  as  well  as  the  characteristic 
hands  and  the  unusual  landscape.     The  rock  and 
curtain  background  are  uneasy — the  whole  of  the 
background  is  disturbing,  for  everywhere  the  out- 
lines wriggle. 

128)  Portraits    of   Joost    de    Hertoghe    and    Wife. 

129  /  Two  large  full-lengths.  At  one  time  they  were 
doubtless  impressive  if  somewhat  flashy  portraits, 
as  the  composition  and  colour  still  indicate.  The 
original  surface  and  handling  have  disappeared 
under  ancient  restoration.  Notice  the  now  crude 
look  of  the  red  curtain  and  green  leaves  or  the  star- 


DYCK,  ANTHONY  VAN  143 

ing  whites  in  No.  129.  The  faces  have  the  apoplec- 
tic look  of  the  repainted.  The  lady's  face  appears 
as  though  hidden  under  powder  and  rouge.  The 
man's  portrait  was  cut  down  at  one  time  and  after- 
ward the  missing  parts  were  restored.  The  seam 
still  shows  on  the  surface.  But  in  spite  of  injury 
these  portraits  are  still  remarkable.  What  a  grand 
air  they  have! 

119.    Madonna  and  Child,  Magdalen  and  Sinners. 

The  catalogue  says  this  picture  was  painted  under 
"the  strong  influence  of  Rubens,"  but  perhaps  it 
would  be  nearer  the  mark  to  call  the  work  a  Rubens 
weakened  by  the  influence  of  Van  Dyck  and  others. 
The  picture  was  possibly  designed  by  Rubens  and 
he  perhaps  retouched  with  his  own  hand  the  hair 
of  the  Magdalen  as  also  the  flesh-notes  of  the 
Madonna,  Child,  and  Magdalen,  though  this  is 
by  no  means  certain.  Van  Dyck  appears  in  the 
work  at  the  extreme  left  and  in  the  background 
figures.  It  is  a  good  group  of  people  and  still 
good  in  colour.  The  picture  is  injured,  stitched 
together,  and  repainted  in  spots. 

120.   Portrait  of  a  Lady.     A  hasty,  sketchily  done 

Van  Dyck  showing  his  brush  in  the  eyes  and  in 
the  high  lights  of  the  nose  and  brow.     Cleaned  but 
not  repainted.     The  face  is  pallid  but  not  rasp- 
berry-hued  with  overlaid  paint.     Notice  how  the 
nose  is  flattened  by  cleaning  though  still  retaining 
some  colour. 

125.    Portrait  of  Snyders  and  Wife.      A  double  por- 

*  trait  in  Van  Dyck's  early  style.  The  faces  are 
still  very  pure  and  as  the  painter  left  them  save 
for  some  cleaning  that  has  bleached  them.  Notice 
the  drawing  of  the  eyes,  nose,  and  forehead  with 


144  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

the  dragging  of  the  white  paint  in  the  high  lights. 
Van  Dyck  used  this  effective  method  of  modelling 
in  his  early  work.  It  is  one  of  the  earmarks 
whereby  his  work  can  be  detected,  though  it  was 
followed  by  imitators,  pupils,  and  copyists.  The 
Van  der  Geest  portrait  in  the  National  Gallery, 
London,  shows  it  to  advantage.  The  hands  in  this 
No.  125  are  not  very  solid,  and  are  now  a  little 
blackened  by  the  underbasing  showing  through. 

Flemish  School.    See  Netherland  School. 

213.  Hals,   Frans.     Portrait  of  a  Patrician.     A  splen- 

*  did  type  of  the  merchant-patrician  Dutchman  of 
the  seventeenth  century.     It  is  an  intelligent  but 
not  an  intellectual  face,  with  life  and  energy  about 
it  but  no  evidence  of  high  thinking  or  midnight 
study.     Done  in  a  sure  manner  and  yet  with  free- 
dom of   handling.     Look  at  the  drawing  of  the 
hat,  the  belt,  the  fluffy  ruff,  the  dress.     The  large 
figure  is  well  suggested,  the  hands  well  drawn,  the 
face  perhaps  a  little  skimped  in  the  drawing  of  the 
chin  and  under  jaw  but  acceptable.     Look  again 
at  the  coat  of  arms  for  the  ease  and  certainty  of 
its  doing  as  also  for  its  effective  placing  in  the  pic- 
ture.    An  excellent  portrait. 

214.    Portrait  of  a  Patrician's   Wife.      A  companion 

*  piece  to  No.  213  and  possibly  done  at  the  same 
time.     It  has  more  colour  but  seems  a  little  harder 
in  the  drawing  and  in  the  surfaces.     The  face  is 
weaker,   the  ruff   more  brittle,  the  head-dress   a 
little  askew,  the  chain  not  so  effective  as  the  belt 
in  the  companion  picture,  and  the  coat  of  arms 
much  more  perfunctory  in  its  doing.     Hals  painted 
men  better  than  women.     He  was,  in  fact,  a  man's 
painter,  devoted  to  the  physical  presence,  the  bluff, 


HALS,  FRANS  145 

even  the  boisterous  and  the  blowsy,  but  not  fond 
of  the  effeminate.  He  usually  painted  women  with 
some  impatience.  Dirck  Hals  and  others  of  the 
school  were,  however,  given  to  doing  this  sort  of  por- 
trait and  later  it  was  charged  up  to  the  elder  Hals. 

215.   The   Singing   Boys.     Apparently   Hals   in   a 

sketchy  mood  and  not  too  sure  of   his  drawing, 
as  notice  the  head  of  the  larger  boy,  especially  the 
back  of  the  head.     The  hands  are  a  little  laboured ; 
the  lute  fairly  well  drawn.     The  spirit  of  it  is 
lively.     Hals  was  no  sentimentalist,  no  painter  of 
poetry  or  pathos;   he  was  devoted  to  the  physical 
life.     So,    too,    were    his    pupils.     Among    them, 
Judith  Leyster  had  the  habit  of  doing  just  this 
theme,  this  diagonal  grouping,  with  this  rather  in- 
effective drawing  and  handling.     She  probably  did 
this  work. 

216.   The   Happy   Drinker.     A   sketchy    affair   in 

reds,  yellows,  and  browns.     The  handling  is  very 
broad  and  in  the  main  fairly  effective,  but  not 
exactly  in  the  manner  of  Hals.     The  picture  is 
not  convincingly  by  the  master  but  possibly  of 
his  workshop.     Look  at  the  poor  handling  in  the 
hair  and  beard,  or  on  the  front  of  the  dress,  or  the 
drawing  of  the  mouth  and  chin.     The  background 
shading  is  false. 

2171 Portraits  of  Men.     Small  portraits,  very  true 

218  J  in  a  large  way  and  showing  abundant  good  humour 
and  physical  presence.  No.  217  is  a  little  free  in 
the  handling,  as  though  through  impatience,  but 
is  truthful.  No.  218  shows  excellent  painting  in 
the  collar  and  hat — the  inevitable  black  hat  with 
its  sharp  corner  at  the  right.  Both  portraits  may 
have  been  done  in  the  Hals  School. 


146  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

219.    The    Young  Man  with   the  Slouch  Hat.     In 

*  Hals's  late  manner,  and  very  sketchy  in  the  hat, 
hands,  head,  and  figure,  but  wonderfully  effective. 
What  a  massive  head  and  face!     And  what  indi- 
cated bone  and  bulk  of  flesh  in  the  jaw,  cheeks, 
and  forehead!     And,  again,  what  eyes!     It  is  in 
the  grey  key  of  colour  that  Hals  shows  in  his  later 
works,  sombre,  almost  black  and  white,  but  excel- 
lent in  tone.     It  is  the  strongest  Hals  in  this  gal- 
lery as  a  piece  of  pure  painting,  though  not  too 
correct  in  drawing. 

269.  Heist,  Bartholomeus  van  der.  Portrait  of  a 
Man.  A  rather  heavy-faced  character  with  a 
gloomy,  pessimistic  outlook.  The  face  is  weaker 
than  the  hands  or  the  dress  and  ruff.  The  draw- 
ing and  the  painting  are  good.  To  be  compared 
with  the  Velasquez,  Admiral  Borro,  at  Berlin  (No. 
413A).  There  is  a  slight  resemblance  in  hands 
and  pose.  See  the  note  on  the  Berlin  picture. 

101.    Jordaens,   Jakob.     Satyr   with   Peasant  Family. 

Rather  hot  in  colour,  especially  in  the  flesh.  The 
drawing  and  handling  are  very  good.  Probably  a 
variant  of  the  Brussels  picture  (No.  238),  though 
it  is  now  impossible  to  say  which  of  the  many  ver- 
sions is  the  original.  It  is  freely  done,  well  painted, 
and  has  body  and  bulk  to  it  with  good  colour  to 
match.  It  is  as  good  as  many  so-called  Rubenses. 

107.   Family  Group.     The  figures  are  life-size  and 

*  intended  for  portraits.     The  workmanship  is  un- 
even and  some  of  the  heads  have  been  injured  a 
little.     The  good  nature  and  healthfulness  of  the 
group  are  very  apparent.     The  seated  mother  is 
excellent  in  the  painting  of  her  hair,  and  the  rib- 
bons and  flowers  make  a  burst  of  colour..   The 


LASTMAN,  PIETER  147 

father  is  less  interesting.  The  whole  group  is 
well  held  together  and  fills  out  a  decorative  panel 
of  much  beauty.  See  also  No.  104  across  the  room. 

100A.   Family  Group.     A  little  hot  in  colour,  and 

purely  human,  almost  animal  in  feeling,  but  very 
honest  work.  Besides,  it  is  original  and  individ- 
ual. Jordaens  is  here  following  his  own  impulses. 
What  peculiar  reds  and  blues !  What  a  good  group ! 
What  force  it  has! 

103.    Bacchus  as  a  Boy  with  Satyr   and  Nymphs. 

In  a  large,  Rubensesque  style  with  a  landscape 
broad  in  scope.  A  fine  colour  effect  with  some 
good  painting.  As  decoration  it  holds  up  very  well. 
See  also  the  injured  No.  109. 

222.  Keyser,  Thomas  de.     Portrait  of  a  Man.     It  is 

*  hard  in  the  ruff,  beard,  and  hair,  and  glassy  in  the 
dress,  but  exactly  true  in  drawing.     Look  at  the 
eyes  and  brows  with  the  drawing  of  the  large,  flat 
nose!    And  what  a  mass  of  boneless  flesh  in  the 
right  hand! 

223.    Portrait   of   William    VI  of  Hesse.     A  whey- 

*  faced  youth  with  no  great  force  of  character  but 
resting  quietly  while  the  artist  paints  him.     And 
the  artist  did  his  work  very  well.     Notice  the  hair 
and  the  drawing  of  the  face.     Also  the  nice  sug- 
gestion of  colour  in  the  dress.    Perhaps  too  much 
cleaned  in  the  hand  and  face.    Attribution  not 
certain. 

188.  Lastman,  Pieter.  Midas.  The  suggestion  of 
Rembrandt's  masses  of  light  surrounded  by  dark 
is  already  apparent  in  this  work  of  his  master, 
Lastman.  It  is  rather  coarse  in  the  drawing  but 
is,  nevertheless,  a  considerable  picture. 


148  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

479.    Lippi,  Fra  Filippo.     St.  Francis  with  Nuns.     It 

is  true  in  sentiment  if  a  little  monotonous  in  colour 
and  formal  in  the  drawing  of  the  draperies.  Prob- 
ably a  school  piece  and  of  no  great  importance. 

512.  Lotto,  Lorenzo.  Portrait  of  a  Cavalier.  A  thin, 
*  elongated  body  and  face  as  though  some  Parmi- 
gianino  had  had  the  doing  of  them.  The  portrait 
has  merit,  whoever  did  it.  The  angles  of  the  wall 
are  offset  by  the  round  lines  of  the  figure.  The 
costume  is  unique  and  the  colour  very  good. 

265.    Marienhof,   A.     St.  Peter  Released  from  Prison. 

Compared  with  the  same  subject  in  No.  263,  it  is 
a  more  dignified  conception  but  not  so  good  in 
colour  nor  so  well  handled. 

Master  of  the  Death  of  the  Virgin.  See  Cleve, 
Juste  van. 

300.  Metsu,     Gabriel.      The     Almsgiver.      A    nicely 
painted  picture  but  impossible  so  far  as  the  light 
of   the   white   dress   is   concerned.     The   note   is 
forced  and  is  too  high  in  key.     It  makes  a  spot 
on  the  canvas  and  hurts  the  unity  and  ensemble 
of  the  picture.     But  it  is  a  clever  work. 

301.   The   Lute   Player.     Compare   this   with   the 

same  subject  by  Terborch  (No.  289),  on  the  oppo- 
site wall,  to  see  how  Metsu  falls  below  Terborch. 
And  yet  this  Metsu  is  very  well  done.     Notice 
the  hand  on  the  lute,  the  blue  dress,  the  fur. 

511.  Moretto  da  Brescia  (Alessandro  Bonvicino). 
Adoration  of  the  Shepherds.  A  very  large,  double 
composition  with  little  angels  at  the  top.  The 
picture  is  empty  in  the  centre  and  has  now  lost 
any  silvery  tone  it  may  have  had  through  repaint- 


MOSSCHER,  JACOB  VAN  149 

ing.  The  blue  at  the  left  is  a  little  high  in  key. 
Not  Moretto  at  his  best  though  perhaps  at  his 
largest. 

37.  Moro,  Antonio.  William  of  Orange.  A  large  and 
rather  pretentious  portrait.  It  is  hurt  by  the  in- 
sistence upon  the  armour  at  the  expense  of  the  man, 
as  in  modern  portraiture  the  painting  of  the  dress 
at  the  expense  of  the  woman's  head.  The  head 
here  is  very  well  done,  but  too  much  subordinated. 
And  placed  too  high  on  the  panel.  Moro,  in  com- 
mon with  other  painters,  believed  that  placing  the 
figure  high  up  on  the  panel  gave  dignity  to  the  sitter. 
See  Nos.  35  and  36  for  this  high  placing.  The  at- 
tribution is  questioned. 

351  Portraits   of   Johann   Callus  and  Wife.     The 

36  J  man's  portrait  represents  Moro  in  his  soberer 
mood.  It  is  well  drawn.  The  woman's  portrait 
is  hectic  in  flesh  colour  which  may  have  come  from 
repainting.  She  has  an  attractive  personality,  and 
the  portrait  is  interesting — dog  and  all.  These  are 
freely  painted  Moros  and  yet  done  with  accuracy. 

39.   Don  Carlos  of  Spain.     A  true-enough  portrait 

of  a  sad-faced  boy — the  costume,  perhaps,  more 
regal  than  its  wearer.  The  picture  has  darkened 
and  the  face  has  the  apoplectic  colouring  of  No.  36 
— due  again,  possibly,  to  some  restoration.  An 
odd  picture  with  a  Spanish  look  about  it. 

395.  Mosscher,  Jacob  van.  Landscape.  It  shows  the 
influence  of  Molyn  or  Salomon  van  Ruysdael,  but 
it  also  has  a  Rembrandtesque  look,  indicating  that 
there  were  a  number  of  painters  in  Holland  doing 
dark  foregrounds  and  light  skies  in  and  after  Rem- 
brandt's time. 


150  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

23.  Netherland  School  (about  1500).     Portrait  of 
a  Man.     Originally  a  good  portrait  but  now  hurt 
by  repainting  in  both  the  face  and  hands. 

386.  Nolpe,  Pieter.  Village  Scene.  A  landscape  by 
some  follower  of  Van  Goyen  with  Van  Goyen's 
mannered  trees  and  skies.  Nolpe  answers  to  this 
description  and  may  have  painted  this  picture. 
9.  Nuremberg  School.  Portrait  of  Johann  Neu- 
dorfer.  It  is  hard  in  the  drawing.  The  sitter  has 
cocked  eyes,  which  may  suggest  that  the  portrait 
was  at  least  truthful.  The  gold  lettering  is  decora- 
tive. 

10.  — — Portrait  of  Magdalena  Neudorfer.  The  com- 
panion piece  to  No.  9  and  in  the  same  vein.  The 
Teutonic  type  is  strongly  expressed  with  perhaps 
less  hardness  of  line  than  in  No.  9.  The  colour  is 
very  good,  the  hands  excellent,  the  face  outline 
true,  and  beautiful  in  the  manner  of  its  doing. 

24.  Orley,   Bernard   van.     Triptych.    The   attribu- 
tion is  open  to  question,  in  common  with  that  of 
many  other  pictures  placed  under  the  name  of 
Van  Orley.     But  this  picture  is  rather  fine  in  its 
types  of  the  Madonna  and  Christ  in  the  central 
panel.     The  figures  are  short,  but  the  draperies 
fall  fairly  free  and  the  colour  is  excellent.     It  is 
somewhat  injured,  as  in  the  faces  of  the  angels  and 
their  hands,  for  instances. 

500.  Palma  il  Giovine,  Jacopo.  Andromeda.  An  il- 
lustration of  the  rather  heavy  art  of  the  younger 
Palma.  He  was  a  follower  of  Tintoretto  and  dis- 
played more  hasty  facility  than  accuracy  or  right 
spirit.  See  also  No.  502. 

368.  Potter,  Paulus.  In  the  Meadow.  This  time 
Potter  omits  the  poison  green  of  his  foliage  but  sees 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  151 

to  it  that  the  cattle  are  well  whitewashed.  The 
drawing  of  the  cattle  is  not  bad  so  far  as  the  anat- 
omy goes,  but  they  are  dead,  turned-to-stone  cattle. 
And  the  tree  is  made  of  what? 

369.    A  Peasant    with  His  Herd.     With  the  usual 

meagre  inventory  of  hard  cattle  and  Paris-green 
trees.  The  beast  at  the  left  is  well  drawn  and 
fairly  well  painted. 

459.  Poussin,  Nicolas.  Bacchanalian  Scene.  An  ex- 
cellent Poussin  in  both  drawing  and  colour.  And 
with  fine  trees.  The  centralised  spot  of  white  in 
the  figure  of  the  nymph,  of  which  there  is  a  re- 
peated note  in  the  white  cloth  above,  is  noteworthy. 
With  good  grouping  and  action  in  the  figures. 

237.   Rembrandt  van  Ryn.    Portrait  of  the  Painter. 

*  It  is  dated  1634  and  shows  the  supposed  Rembrandt 
as  a  young  man.  The  shadows  on  the  face  and 
cloak  are  clear  and  luminous  and  the  eyes,  nose, 
and  mouth  are  well  drawn.  The  helmet  also  is 
excellent,  especially  in  the  high  lights.  A  broad 
method  of  seeing  and  doing,  a  certainty  of  touch 
are  apparent  here.  The  colour  is  rich  in  the  red- 
dish-browns of  the  dress  although  it  is  dated  1634. 
Apparently  in  good  condition. 

234.    Portrait  of  Coppenol  the  Writing-Master.     A 

**  dull,  stupid  character  with  a  fat  face  and  fore- 
head, the  flesh  rather  soft,  the  hair  rather  moth- 
eaten,  the  eyes  narrow  and  wandering,  the  mouth 
small  and  petty,  the  hands  fat  and  practically  use- 
less. What  a  perfect  epitome  of  a  more  or  less 
commonplace  character!  As  a  psychological  and 
physiological  study,  it  is  perfection;  as  a  portrait, 
it  is  one  of  Rembrandt's  very  best.  Was  there 


L52  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

ever  before  such  flesh  painting  as  here  or  such  a 
realisation  of  actual  bone  structure  under  flesh  as 
here!  Notice  the  forehead,  the  eyes,  the  nose,  and 
the  mouth — how  wonderfully  they  are  rendered! 
And  what  hands — what  wonderfully  living,  actual 
hands  of  flesh  these  are!  Notice  also  the  luminous 
envelope  of  air  and  the  luminous  shadow  on  the 
side  of  the  face.  It  is  a  masterpiece  that  should 
be  accepted  as  a  Rembrandt  criterion  of  style, 
method,  and  manner  during  his  grey  period.  In 
good  condition. 

242.    Landscape  with  Ruins.     The  foreground  be- 

*  low  is  darkened,  and  the  sky  above  also  is  darkened 
by  a  thunder-cloud  in  order  to  focus  the  light 
strongly  in  the  central  sky.  The  result  may  be 
called  "forced,"  but  it  is  also  forceful  in  giving 
the  feeling  of  penetrating  light.  The  colour  of  the 
foreground  is  effective,  cooled  somewhat  by  the 
sky,  but  still  helping  to  produce  a  warm-toned  pic- 
ture. The  movement  of  the  thunder-cloud  is  well 
suggested.  The  central  idea  of  the  picture,  how- 
ever, is  the  light  that  penetrates  and  permeates. 
It  is  not  so  wonderful  a  performance  as  is  sometimes 
given  out,  and,  for  all  its  excellence,  might  have 
been  done  by  Pieter  de  Molyn  or  Hercules  Seghers. 
That  is  to  say,  they  did  things  in  this  manner  and 
almost  as  forceful,  as  see  the  Molyn  landscape  in 
the  Berlin  Gallery  (No.  960B)  and  the  so-called 
Rembrandt  follower  in  the  Dresden  Gallery  (No. 
1575).  But  the  picture  is  to  be  accepted  as 
an  effective  and  beautiful  landscape.  It  is  worthy 
of  Rembrandt,  but  whether  by  him  or  not  is  un- 
certain. The  thunder-cloud  is  a  Seghers  earmark 
to  which  frequent  reference  has  been  made  in  these 
volumes. 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  153 

236.   Saskia.    This  is  the  famous  Saskia  with  the 

***  velvet  hat  of  red  cockscomb  colour.  It  is  a  pic- 
ture of  Rembrandt's  early  time,  really  supreme  in 
its  splendour  of  colour  and  wonderful  in  its  accu- 
racy, truth,  and  beauty.  There  is  perhaps  too 
much  colour,  too  many  jewels.  The  dress  is  a  lit- 
tle ornate  and  barbaric.  But  Rembrandt  planned 
just  that  riot  of  brilliant  hues.  How  marvellous 
is  the  painting  of  the  hat,  the  dress,  the  throat- 
piece  with  its  jewels,  the  earrings,  the  bangles, 
the  fur,  the  velvet!  It  is  all  free  work  yet  accu- 
rate; it  is  not  niggled  like  a  Dou,  or  sweetened  like 
a  Poorter.  Notice  the  peculiar  flesh  tone  that 
goes  with  a  woman  of  auburn  hair — how  infallibly 
he  has  hit  it!  The  neck  is  small;  Saskia  here  looks 
ill.  The  face  is  a  little  thin  and  the  profile  some- 
what hard,  but  how  perfectly  it  is  cut,  with  what 
a  mouth,  nostril,  and  eye!  And  what  very  lovely 
hair  as  Rembrandt  has  painted  it!  The  hands 
are  under  shadow  and  subordinated,  but  suggestive 
in  their  reality.  A  masterwork  of  the  most  bril- 
liant quality,  though  perhaps  not  so  enduringly 
satisfactory  as  some  of  his  later  and  simpler  por- 
traits. 

231.    Portrait  of  a  Man  with  a  Golden  Chain.     It 

shows  a  spare,  meagre  face  with  the  waste  of  flesh 
and  the  wrinkles  that  come  with  age.  The  flesh  is 
somewhat  kneaded  and  the  beard  a  bit  tortured. 
The  shadow  under  the  cap  is  luminous.  A  good 
work  but  not  among  the  best  portraits  in  this  gal- 
lery. It  is  the  same  model  that  appears  in  No. 
233  and  in  the  Abraham  Sacrificing  Isaac  at  Munich 
(No.  332),  assigned  to  Rembrandt.  This  portrait 
(No.  231)  was  probably  done  by  Lievens.  It 
agrees  with  Nos.  229,  230,  233  in  this  gallery. 


154  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

239.    Portrait  of  an  Unknown  Man.     A  full-length, 

supposed  to  have  been  done  in  1639,  with  a  yellow- 
brown  flush  about  the  background.     The  man  is 
short,  red-faced,  and  wholly  uninteresting  save  for 
the  manner  of  his  painting.     The  light  is   more 
or  less  diffused  through  the  room  and  the  man  is 
standing  against  a  pilaster.     He  rests  well  on  his 
feet.     The  black  clothes  are  carefully  done — better, 
perhaps,  than  the  face  and  hair,  which  leave  us 
unmoved.     It  is  somewhat  injured  by  repainting, 
but  it  never  could  have  been  one  of  Rembrandt's 
successes.     It  somehow  reminds  one  of  the  figure 
of  Captain  Frans  Banning  Cock  in  the  Night 
Watch  at  Amsterdam,  though  of  course  not  nearly 
so  well  done. 

240.    The  Holy  Family.      A  small  picture,   rather 

fine  in  colour  and  freely,  even  carelessly,  done  as 
regards  the  drawing.     It  has  no  earmarks  of  Rem- 
brandt about  it  and  is  probably  the  work  of  some 
follower  of  Adriaen  van  Ostade.    The  curtain  is 
drawn  back  as  though  a  scene  in  a  theatre  were 
being  disclosed.     In  measure  like  the  alleged  Rem- 
brandt at  the  Hermitage  of  the  Holy  Family  (No. 
796),  and  the  picture  in  the  Louvre  (No.  2542). 

245.    Portrait    Called    The    Watch.      It    is    dated 

1655,  and  if  we  accept  the  date  as  genuine  the 
picture  must  be  referred  to  Rembrandt's  late  period. 
The  hands  are  large  but  not  square  or  sooty,  and 
the  shadows  are  dark  but  not  blackish.  The 
handling  is  heavy  in  face  and  hands  and  the  lights 
are  a  bit  uncertain.  Not  Rembrandt  at  his  best,  if 
Rembrandt  at  all.  It  comes  nearer,  perhaps,  to 
Fabritius  but  there  is  little  to  substantiate  such 
a  suggestion.  The  forged  signature  of  Rembrandt 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  155 

and  the  date  of  1655  are  placed  over  an  illegible  in- 
scription that  is  probably  genuine. 

249.  -  —  Isaac  Blessing  Jacob.  The  date  says  1656, 
but  the  picture  itself  indicates  that  Rembrandt  or 
a  follower  possibly  started  it  earlier  and  never 
finished  it,  that  it  was  possibly  sold  among  his 
effects  after  his  death,  and  that  it  is  not  to  be  con- 
sidered a  finished  product.  All  painters  die  leav- 
ing unfinished  work  and  unsatisfactory  "starts" 
behind  them.  The  background  and  the  condition 
of  the  hands  in  this  picture  show  this  incomplete 
state.  The  colour  is  good  and  the  feeling  of  the 
old  man  rising  up  in  bed  is  well  given,  but  the 
picture  has  no  air  or  space  or  distance  in  it  and 
the  handling  is  heavy.  Notice  the  dress  and  hands 
of  the  woman  at  the  right,  and  the  square  ribbing 
in  the  sleeve  of  Jacob.  Neither  has  a  Rembrandt- 
esque  look. 

243.  Portrait  of  Nicolas  Bruyningh.  It  has  a  sug- 
gestion of  golden-browns  about  it  and  is  interest- 
ing in  its  treatment  of  shadows  about  the  face  and 
hair  and  across  the  figure.  There  is  something 
of  mystery  about  the  shadows  that  is  attractive, 
but  in  realising  the  model  or  showing  the  actual 
truth  of  appearance  this  work  is  not  to  be  compared 
with,  say,  No.  234.  It  is  less  definite  and  has 
not  the  firmness  or  positiveness  of  Rembrandt. 
The  face  is  similar  to  that  of  the  face  of  the  angel 
in  Jacob  Wrestling  with  the  Angel,  at  Berlin  (No. 
828).  Possibly  Bol  did  both  works. 

247  1 Two  Study  Heads.    They  are  evidently  studio 

248  /  memoranda  made  by  pupils  or  followers  of  Rem- 

brandt.    A  number  of  these  small  portraits  are  in 
existence.    See  those  in  the  Antwerp  Gallery,  Nos. 


156  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

294-295.  Any  one  of  half  a  dozen  pupils  might 
have  done  them. 

229.    Portrait  of  the  Painter.     A  small  picture  with 

a  dark  shadow  over  the  eyes  and  forehead  that 
does  not  indicate  Rembrandt.  There  is  no  cer- 
tainty about  either  the  subject  or  the  painter. 
The  hair  is  scratched  with  the  wooden  end  of  the 
brush  to  make  ringlets.  This  is  a  mannerism  of 
Jan  Lievens.  The  portrait  bears  other  indications 
of  being  by  him,  such  as  the  soft  modelling. 

232.    Study  Head  of  an  Old  Man.     As  fine  a  piece 

*      of  skull  and  head  drawing  as  one  may  see  in  a 

day's  journey  through  any  gallery.  And  not  less 
so  the  drawing  of  the  brows,  the  half-hidden  eyes, 
the  nose,  and  the  indicated  mouth.  An  excellent 
piece  of  work,  but  is  that  of  itself  sufficient  for 
calling  it  a  Rembrandt?  Aside  from  the  general 
Rembrandt  formula,  followed  by  a  score  of  painters, 
it  has  not  too  much  of  Rembrandt's  quality  or 
individuality  about  it.  The  man  who  painted  the 
Hermit  Reading  in  the  Louvre  (No.  2541A)  might 
have  done  it,  but  that  man  was  probably  Dou. 
Dou  and  his  imitator,  Brekelenkam,  besides  others 
of  the  school,  did  this  same  head  again  and  again, 
but  it  must  be  admitted  with  never  the  strength  of 
this  example.  See  the  note  on  the  Louvre  pic- 
ture. It  is  there  put  down  to  Rembrandt. 

233.   Head  of  an  Old  Man.     Rather  red  in  the  face 

and  laboured  in  the  flesh  painting,  as  though  the 
painter   had  gone  over  it  again  and  again  or  it 
had  been  repainted  by  a  later  hand.    It  is  effec- 
tive at  a  distance  but   disturbing  by  its   super- 
abundance of  wrinkles.     The  head  and  hair  are 
put  in  with  many  strokes  of  the  brush  and  then, 


REMBRANDT  VAN  RYN  157 

as  though  still  dissatisfied  with  the  result,  the  sur- 
face is  cut  into  by  the  wooden  end  of  the  brush 
through  the  wet  paint.  Notice  this  in  the  forehead. 
The  handling,  drawing,  modelling  show  the  brush 
of  Lievens.  The  model  appears  at  Munich  in  the 
Sacrifice  of  Abraham  (No.  332). 

235.    Portrait  of  the  Poet  KruL     A  sneering  and 

somewhat  disagreeable  personality  in  black  on  a 
grey  ground,  done  easily  enough,  but  not  an  in- 
spired or  inspiring  piece  of  work.  It  looks  a  bit 
perfunctory.  The  flesh  is  hot,  the  left  hand  and 
arm  badly  placed,  the  background  formal.  A 
large  picture  but  with  little  pronounced  colour. 

238.    Portrait  of  a  Young  Woman.     This  is  a  later 

**  work  than  the  Saskia  (No.  236)  and  in  some  re- 
spects nearly  as  good,  though,  of  course,  not  so 
astonishing  a  picture  nor  so  celebrated,  not  so 
sure  in  drawing  and  handling.  The  colour  effect 
is  quieter,  more  harmonious,  more  restful,  more 
altogether  pleasing.  The  handling  is  broader, 
freer,  more  mature,  as  notice  the  doing  of  the  dress, 
the  lovely  white  at  the  throat,  the  beautiful  hair, 
the  glove,  the  flower,  the  jewels.  The  shadows 
about  the  throat  are  almost  perfect,  and  the  golden 
tone  of  colour  most  decorative.  The  type  of 
woman  here  shown  is  not  bothered  by  her  want 
of  good  looks.  She  is  serene  and  simple  in  her  un- 
consciousness— a  plain  type  not  given  to  pose  or  pre- 
tence. Perhaps  that  is  why  the  portrait  satisfies. 
It  has  no  striking  effect  or  elaborateness  of  detail 
as  in  the  Saskia.  It  is  of  a  golden  colour,  not  only 
in  the  hair  and  robe  but  also  in  the  background. 

244.  -Portrait  of  the  Painter.     The  so-called  Rem- 

*      brandt  is  here  shown  well  along  in  life,  square  of 


158  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

face,  and  penetrating  of  eye.  The  tone  is  dark — 
darker  than  in  his  golden  period — the  flesh  inclined 
to  be  hot,  the  shadows  still  luminous.  Again  one 
must  ask  how  it  happens  that  the  Rembrandt  por- 
traits are  so  different  one  from  another  if  one  hand 
did  them  all?  Is  it  not  conceivable  that  his  room- 
ful of  pupils  might  have  used  him  for  a  model  or 
used  a  model  which  is  now  called  Rembrandt,  and 
that  the  difference  in  the  portraits  is  one  of  point  of 
view  and  temperament?  Here  the  work  rather  in- 
dicates Rembrandt's  own  hand,  but  one  need  not 
be  too  certain  about  it  one  way  or  the  other.  It 
is  a  good  portrait,  but  it  may  be  school  work  for 
all  that. 

246.    Portrait  of  an  Architect.     It  is  dated  1656, 

*  and  is  usually  referred  to  Rembrandt's  late  period. 
The  shadows  are  luminous,  the  brush  is  a  little 
fumbling  about  the  hair  but  gives  a  mystery  of 
shadow  in  the  face  with  marked  effect.  The  fur 
is  somewhat  tortured,  as  is  also  the  beard,  and 
there  is  some  softness  in  the  modelling.  There  is 
an  interest  shown  in  such  accidental  effects  as  the 
white  flesh  on  the  wrist  above  the  line  of  sun  tan 
and  in  the  protruding  veins  of  age  in  the  back  of 
the  left  hand.  The  portrait  was  possibly  painted 
by  Nicolas  Maes  in  his  middle  period.  See  the 
resemblance  to  the  portrait  of  a  similar  old  man 
at  The  Hague  (No.  90)  by  Maes;  and  again  in  a 
supposed  Rembrandt  portrait  of  an  old  man  at 
one  time  in  the  Carstanjen  Collection.  Again  it 
must  be  admitted  that  The  Hague  portrait  is  much 
weaker  than  this  one  at  Cassel.  Perhaps  that  is 
why  it  still  passes  as  a  Maes.  His  best  works 
have  been  handed  over  to  Rembrandt. 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  159 

230.    Rembrandt's  Father.     One  might  quarrel  over 

the  title,  but  it  is  hardly  worth  while.  This  is  a 
study  head,  not  done  in  the  style  of  No.  234  or 
237  but  with  much  repetition  of  stroke  for  effects 
of  age  and  wrinkles.  It  belongs  in  the  category 
of  No.  233  (which  see)  and  was  probably  done  by 
Lievens. 

241.   Landscape.     This  may  be  accepted  as  a  mere 

guess,  so  far  as  the  attribution  goes.  As  art,  the 
picture  is  of  no  importance. 

590.  Ribera,  Jusefe  (Lo  Spagnoletto).  Mater  Do/o- 
*  rosa.  It  is  not  blackened  by  shadows  and  has  a 
good  colour  effect.  The  surface  is  somewhat  over- 
cleaned,  but  the  brush-work  in  the  face  and  head- 
dress is  still  plainly  shown.  A  very  good  Ribera, 
following  Titian. 

502A.  Romanino,  II  (Girolamo  Romani).  The  Apostle 
Peter.  A  very  acceptable  apostle,  not  too  badly 
drawn  and  of  fair  colour  quality.  The  sleeve  and 
the  high  light  on  the  red  underdress  are  rather 
disturbing,  but  for  the  rest,  including  the  landscape, 
it  is  very  good.  Romanino  was  a  weaker  brother 
following  Giorgione  but  not  incapable  of  producing 
good  work. 

503.   Apostle  Paul.    This  is  a  companion  piece  to 

No.  502A  and  of  the  same  or  similar  quality.  The 
hand  is  a  little  small  and  harshly  drawn  in  the 
joints  as  in  No.  502A.  The  landscape  a  bit  crude. 

93.  Rubens,  Peter  Paul.  Diana  and  Nymphs  Sur- 
prised by  Satyrs.  The  picture  is  a  negligible 
work  and  is  in  poor  condition.  It  is  a  question 
whether  it  is  more  than  a  school  piece.  The  hands 
are  badly  drawn,  the  colour  is  lacking  in  quality, 


160  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

and  the  picture  wants  verve  throughout.  Notice 
the  grey  sky  and  the  coarse  landscape.  The  figures 
are  somewhat  like  them.  The  dog  is  said  to  be 
by  Snyders  and  the  landscape  by  Wildens. 

91.    Hero    Crowned    by    Victory.      It  is   similar  to 

a  picture  of  the  same  title  in  the  Dresden  Gallery. 
There  are  here  some  good  flesh  painting,  fine  robes, 
and  resplendent  armour.     The  hair  and  flesh  of  the 
Victory  and  of  the  bound  captive  are  almost  in 
their  original  state,  though  the  picture,  as  a  whole, 
has  been  over-cleaned  and  some  of  the  surfaces 
and  modelling  destroyed.     Moreover,  much  of  it 
was  done  by  pupils  or  added  later,  as,  for  instance, 
the  head,  hand,  and  wing  of  the  second  small  Vic- 
tory at  the  top,  the  shield  of  the  warrior,  and  all 
the  paraphernalia  at  the  right.     A  smaller  version 
of  this  picture  is  in  the  Vienna  Gallery. 

92.    Nicolas   de   Respaigne   in    Oriental  Dress.     A 

fine  portrait.  The  figure  stands  firmly  on  both 
feet,  in  more  of  a  Teutonic  than  an  Oriental  fashion. 
The  bulk  and  body  are  well  given  and  with  an 
unusual  display  of  colour  for  a  portrait.  The 
Oriental  rug  helps  out  the  colour  scheme  of  the 
costume.  The  portrait  has  the  surprise  of  the  un- 
expected. Stained  in  the  shadow  on  the  rug,  and 
the  background  does  not  now  recede  as  it  should. 
The  sitter  appears  as  one  of  the  kings  in  Rubens's 
Adoration  of  the  Magi  at  Antwerp. 

87.  Flight  into  Egypt.  Possibly  a  study  for  some- 
thing larger,  done  sketchily  and  hastily  but  effec- 
tively. The  centralised  lighting  and  grouping  are 
distinctly  like  the  work  of  the  smaller  Netherland 
painters  of  the  time.  The  artificial  light  of  the 
figures  is  repeated  faintly  in  a  moonlight  at  the 


RUBENS,  PETER  PAUL  161 

back.  Joseph  is  seen  looking  behind  him  as  though 
apprehensive  of  pursuit. 

89.    Portrait   of  a    Young  Man.     This  portrait  is 

very  nearly  as  it  was  when  originally  painted — a 
little  slippery,  soapy,  and  flowing  in  the  handling, 
and  dark  in  the  shadow  of  the  neck,  but  effectively 
drawn  and  easy  in  brush-work.  The  young  man 
is  not  exactly  an  intellectual  type.  He  probably 
had  more  blood  in  his  veins  than  brains  in  his  head. 
A  good  portrait  of  physical  life  but  perhaps  not 
by  Rubens. 

86.   Jupiter  and  Calisto.     A  picture  probably  done 

*  by  Rubens's  own  hand  and  a  good  example  of  his 
early  art.  How  lovely  the  head  of  Calisto  with 
her  wealth  of  golden  hair  so  beautifully  brushed 
in  by  the  painter!  The  legs  and  the  entire  figure 
of  the  nymph  have  been  flattened  by  too  much 
cleaning,  and  the  more  delicate  modelling  in  the 
knees,  feet,  and  arms  badly  hurt.  Again  the 
shadows  have  blistered  and  darkened  somewhat, 
notably  in  the  wings  of  the  eagle,  the  back  of  Ca- 
listo, and  on  the  arms.  There  has  also  been  some 
repainting.  But  in  spite  of  this  the  picture  remains 
a  most  graceful  piece  of  grouping  in  a  fine  landscape. 
How  different  the  landscape  from  the  spotty  af- 
fairs usually  attributed  to  Rubens !  And  yet  this  is 
hardly  the  Rubens  landscape.  Notice  the  colour 
as  compared  with,  say,  No.  85. 

85.    Venus,  Cupid,  Bacchus,  and  Ceres.     A  group 

of  figures  now  much  changed  in  the  colour  of  the 
flesh  and  stained  in  spots.  It  is  not  so  fine  a  work 
as  No.  86.  Compare  the  hair  of  these  women  with 
that  of  the  Calisto  in  No.  86;  also  the  drawing  of 


162  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

the  hands,  arms,  and  feet,  the  quality  of  colour,  and 
the  wide  gap  between  them  will  be  apparent.  The 
Calisto  is  by  Rubens  himself,  whereas  this  picture 
is  only  a  school  piece  or  by  some  follower. 

88.    Meleager  and  Atalanta.     It  still  has  fine  quali- 

*  ties,  but,  like  many  of  the  Rubenses  painted  on 
wood,  it  has  been  much  cleaned.     The  modelling  of 
Atalanta's  left  arm  is  almost  gone  and  the  bracelet 
upon  it  has  been  fairly  scrubbed  away.     Notice 
also  the  bad  shape  of  the  man's  hand  at  the  right, 
caused  by  scrubbing  again,  with  perhaps  some  bad 
drawing  originally.     The  boar's  head  is  intact,  also 
the  heads  at  left  and  right.     Atalanta's  hair  is  still 
in  good  condition,  but  the  shadow  on  the  neck 
has  changed  in  value,  due  to  over-cleaning,  which 
allows  the  under-basing  to  show.     A  fine  work,  in 
spite  of  its  injuries,  and  still  possessing  much  bril- 
liancy of  colour.     The  dog  and  boar  are  said  to 
be  by  Snyders.     A  version  of  this  picture  was  in 
the  Kann  Collection,  Paris. 

90.   Lady  with  a  Mirror.    Originally,  no  doubt,  it 

*  was  easily  and  sketchily  painted,  but  now,  as  seems 
the  fate  with  almost  all  pictures,  it  shows  too  much 
cleaning  in  the  face  and  too  much  repainting  in 
the  hands  and  arms.     The  hands  are  far  removed 
from   Rubens.     And   what   a   strange  scheme  of 
colour — green  upon  blue-grey,  set  off  by  flesh-notes 
as  the  high  light!     A  very  engaging  picture — orig- 
inally, no  doubt,  beautiful  in  the  hands,  wrists, 
ruffs,  and  the  dress  with  the  pronounced  feeling 
of  the  figure  under  it.     Some  features  of  it,  such 
as  the  ruffs  at  the  wrists  and  the  hands,  suggest 
Van  Dyck's  brush,  but  none  of  it  reminds  one  of 
Rubens. 


SCOREL,  JAN  VAN  163 

94.  The  Drunken  Silenus.  The  catalogue  calls  it 

a  part  replica  of  the  Munich  picture,  but  it  never- 
theless shows  some  good  work  in  the  head  of  the 
faun,  in  the  grapes,  and  in  the  heavy  body  of  Si- 
lenus. It  was  never  a  perfect  piece  and  is  now 
injured  by  cleaning. 

398A.  Ruisdael,  Jacob  van.  Sea  Beach.  With  well- 
painted  dunes  at  the  right.  The  clouds  and  sea 
are  carelessly  and  indifferently  done.  A  little  un- 
usual in  theme  and  acceptable  on  that  account 
after  the  many  examples  of  the  mountain  water- 
fall. But  see  No.  374,  by  Van  de  Velde,  for  per- 
haps better  work. 

398.  Landscape  with  Waterfall.  It  is  the  usual 

Ruisdael  performance,  though  perhaps  a  little 
more  perfunctory  and  unreal  in  the  dashing  water 
and  the  stained  sky  than  he  usually  gives  us. 

34.  Scorel,  Jan  van.  Madonna  and  Child.  Look 
at  it  a  moment  for  the  large  if  rather  hard  drawing 
and  the  odd  Flemish-Italian  colour.  It  has  much 
strength  and  is  not  without  a  touch  of  true  senti- 
ment. The  attribution  is  questionable. 

33.    Family  Party  at  Table.     What  a  strong  piece 

*  of  work!  The  drawing  of  it  is  savage  and  the  col- 
our perhaps  unreal  but  they  are  certainly  positive. 
The  heads  and  hands  are  wonderfully  rendered. 
And  where  could  one  see  better  painted  still-life! 
The  more  one  studies  it  the  more  wonderful  it 
becomes.  Look  closely  at  the  drawing  of  the 
man's  eyes,  nose,  and  mouth,  his  hand  with  the 
glass,  the  children's  faces  and  their  astonishing  life, 
the  mother's  hands,  the  fruit,  the  basket.  A  very 
fine  picture.  Formerly  catalogued  as  a  Holbein 
and  then  as  a  Heemskerck. 


164  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

115.  Snyders,  Frans.  Still-Life.  Rasping  and  sav- 
age painting,  but  effective  in  giving  a  certain  real- 
istic appearance  with  good  colour.  Snyders,  with 
an  inordinate  reputation  as  an  animal  painter, 
has  always  seemed  secure  in  a  lofty  niche,  though 
he  was  not  the  equal  of  Rubens  in  this  genre,  and 
even  Velasquez  and  Van  Dyck  went  beyond  him 
in  painting  dogs. 

485.  Spanish  School  (?).  Portrait  of  a  Man.  The 
queried  attribution  on  the  frame  is  pertinent.  One 
cannot  say  with  any  positiveness  who  did  it  or 
what  school  it  belongs  to.  It  would  seem  more 
French  than  Spanish  or  Italian  in  spite  of  the  table- 
cloth and  a  Sanchez-Coello  look  to  the  dress.  The 
face  and  hands  have  been  repainted.  Formerly 
attributed  to  Pontormo  and  then  to  the  Florentine 
School. 

296.  Steen,  Jan.  The  Bean  Feast.  With  a  huge, 
*  lounging  woman  in  a  yellow  skirt  and  red  bodice 
in  the  centre.  Look  at  the  abandon  of  this  figure 
—the  half-tipsy  sag  and  settle  of  it — and  the  leer- 
ing face.  In  contrast,  notice  the  charming,  naive 
quality  of  the  child,  the  repetition  of  the  yellow 
note  in  his  little  coat,  and  the  excellence  of  the 
painting  of  the  coat.  The  group  at  right,  with  the 
tall  buffoon  (the  Bean  King),  is  less  well  done.  A 
good  Steen. 

141.  Teniers  the  Younger,  David.  Christ  Shown  by 
Pilate.  Look  at  the  figures  in  the  mob  below,  or 
on  the  platform  above  for  their  free  painting  and 
excellent  colour.  There  are  a  number  of  small 
Teniers  here  worth  looking  at,  such  as  Nos.  142 
and  143. 


TITIAN  (TIZIANO  VECELLIO)  165 

288.  Terborch,  Gerard.     A  Family  Concert.     A  well- 
known  Terborch  and  an  excellent  one,  though  not 
so  simple  in  grouping  as  is  usual  with  this  painter. 
Again  the  satin  dress,  and  this  time  with  good  re- 
sults.    It  is  beautifully  done,  as  also  the  brown 
coat.     The  table-cloth,  the  figure  back  of  it,  and 
the  still-life  are  well  given.     Notice  the  good  draw- 
ing of  the  room  and  how  the  picture  on  the  wall 
keeps  its  place.     Injured  a  little  by  cleaning  and 
retouching. 

289.    The  Lute-Player.     One  of  the  most  charm- 

**     ing  of  Terborch's  satin-dress  pictures.     A  perfect 

piece  of  drawing  as  of  colour.  Notice  the  draw- 
ing of  the  hands,  especially  of  the  right  one,  and 
of  the  lute,  the  table-cloth,  the  chair,  the  wall,  the 
room.  The  grey  of  the  wall  and  the  atmosphere 
between  the  wall  and  the  player  are  attractive. 
Perhaps  the  lady's  dress  is  a  little  high  in  key. 
As  for  the  lady  herself,  what  a  charming  person- 
ality she  has!  A  very  popular  but  very  good  Ter- 
borch. Injured  in  spots. 

497.  Tintoretto,  Jacopo  (Robust!)  (?).  Portrait  of 
a  Man.  Time  was  when  gallery  directors  would 
have  scheduled  this  as  a  Spanish  picture  and  seen 
a  "black-muzzled  Spaniard "  in  its  subject;  but 
now  it  is  put  down  to  Tintoretto  with  a  query. 
Berenson  gives  it  to  Farinati.  But  may  it  not  be 
nearer  the  Bassani  whom  II  Greco  followed?  The 
II  Greco  look  of  it  would,  perhaps,  thus  be  accounted 
for,  since  he  was  much  influenced  by  Leandro  and, 
perhaps,  Francesco  Bassano.  A  haughty,  noble 
character  and  a  very  good  portrait. 

488.  Titian  (Tiziano  Vecellio).  Portrait  of  the  Duke 
of  AtrL  At  one  time  an  impressive  if  preten- 


166  THE  CASSEL  GALLERY 

tious  portrait,  though  the  effect  of  the  man's  legs 
being  too  short  and  the  body  too  long  (produced 
by  the  small-clothes)  must  always  have  been  dis- 
turbing. The  colour  of  the  costume  is  flamboyant 
and  the  plumed  helmet  at  the  left  is  gorgeous. 
The  picture  has  been  hurt  by  repainting.  The 
flesh  is  now  hectic,  the  hand  is  nearly  wrecked,  the 
cupid  and  the  landscape  are  much  scumbled  over, 
made  messy  and  uncertain.  It  is  not  by  Titian 
though  possibly  done  in  his  school  and  under  his 
influence. 

374.  Velde,  Adriaen  van  de.  Sea  Beach.  What  a 
fine  study  of  a  beach  with  people!  And  notice  the 
well-drawn  waves  such  as  you  can  see  at  this  day 
on  the  beach  at  Scheveningen.  The  sky  is  a  little 
thin  but  high  and  expansive;  the  dunes  at  the  left 
are  excellent. 

420.  Velde    the    Younger,   Willem    van  de.     Calm 
Sea.     A  very  good  Van  de  Velde,  a  little  frail  in 
colour  and  thin  in  sea  and  sky,  but  it  has  a  pleasant, 
silvery  tone. 

421.   Calm  Sea.    It  is  one  of  Van  de  Velde 's  thin 

repetitions  of  a  picture  grown  familiar  to  every 
habitu£  of  galleries.    He  finally  became  almost  as 
mechanical  with  this  theme  as  Ruisdael  with  his 
waterfalls. 

496.    Venetian  School.      Portrait  of  a  Lady.      It  is  too 

badly  damaged  to  make  out  its  painter.  The 
hands,  face,  and  hair  have  all  been  daubed  over 
by  some  old-time  restorer  with  a  paint  pot  in  one 
hand  and  a  careless  brush  in  the  other.  Notice 
the  now  hard  drawing  of  the  eyes,  the  mouth,  or 
the  face  outline.  But  it  still  has  style  about  it. 
Now  (1913)  catalogued  as  a  copy  of  a  lost  Titian. 


WOUWERMAN,  PHILIPS  167 

504.    Veronese,  Paolo  (Caliari).    The  Dying  Cleopatra. 

The  attribution  is  very  questionable.  Even  a  hasty 
glance  at  the  picture  reveals  likenesses  to,  say, 
the  decadent  school  of  Guido  Reni  rather  than 
that  of  Paolo.  Look  at  the  dropsical  hands  and 
the  pulpy  body.  The  robe  and  landscape  are  like 
the  work  of  the  late  Venetians  but  not  the  figure. 
Repainted  in  parts. 

98.  Vos,  Cornells  de.  Portrait  of  a  Man.  A  fine 
type  but  ill  drawn  in  the  eyes.  Unfortunately  the 
canvas  is  in  bad  condition,  and  it  is  impossible  to 
judge  De  Vos  by  it. 

377.  Weenix,  Jan.  Still-Life.  If  the  realistic  paint- 
ing of  rabbit's  fur  and  chicken's  feathers  consti- 
tutes fine  art,  then  here  we  have  it.  The  picture 
would  reproduce  in  a  colour  print  very  well,  and 
perhaps  that  was  its  destined  mission  on  earth. 

355.  Wouwerman,  Philips.  The  Harvest.  This  pic- 
ture is  painted  with  so  much  verve  and  so  well  that 
one  wonders  if  Wouwerman  did  it.  Notice  the  fine 
and  effective  handling  all  through  it.  No.  346  is 
not  unlike  it. 


INDEX  OF  PICTURES  BY  NUMBERS 


6.   Diirer. 

100A 

7.   Baldung. 

n  ^ 

101 

Jordaens. 

1  Q  >  Nuremberg  School. 

103 
107 

10A.  Altdorfer. 
13 

2221 
223  J 

Keyser. 

14  \  Cranach  the  Elder. 

1  "    I 

229-1 

O  A  f\ 

>  Rembrandt. 

15  J 

249 

19.   Cranach  the  Younger. 

256. 

Brouwer. 

20  1 
21  f  Cleve,  Juste  van. 

2571 
258  J 

Dou. 

23.   Netherland  School. 

263.   Cuyp,  B.  G. 

24.    Orley. 

265. 

Marienhof. 

26.   Cleve,  Juste  van. 

269.   Heist,  Van  der. 

29.   Cornelisz     van     Oost- 
sanen. 

I^Terborch. 

32.   Apt. 

296.   Steen. 

oo 

qnn  "j 

34    Scorel. 

OUU  1 

301] 

Metsu. 

35' 

355. 

Wouwennan. 

37    Moro. 

369  J 

Potter. 

39 

374.   Velde,  A.  van  de. 

41.   Beuckelaer. 

377. 

Weenix. 

54.   Brueghel  the  Elder,  Jan. 

386. 

Nolpe. 

Q,    >  Rubens. 

395. 

OQO 

Mosscher. 

98.   Vos,  C.  de. 

oyo 
398AJ 

>  Ruisdael,  J.  van. 

170 


INDEX 


,  W.  van  de. 

459.  Poussin. 

479.  Lippi,  Fra  Filippo. 

482.  Bartolommeo    di    Gio- 
vanni. 

484.  Bacchiacca. 

485.  Spanish  School. 
488.  Titian. 

496.   Venetian  School. 


Romanino. 


497.  Tintoretto. 

500.  Palma  the  Younger. 

502A 

503 

504.  Veronese,  P. 

511.  Moretto. 

512.  Lotto. 
590.  Ribera. 
833.  Amberger. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

LOAN  DEPT. 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 

on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


LlbKAKI   UJi. 

-    Q    I  M  j  I  1 

«&r:u  d 

APR    9  1970 

LD  21A-60?n-10.'65 


General  Library 


/K2 


393596 


UMVERSITV  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


